Final separation of the northern and southern Netherlands.
Alexander Farnese, prince of Parma, governor-general.
Successes of Parma.
Albert and Isabel, sovereigns of the Netherlands.
The twelve years' truce.
The rule of the archdukes.
Reversion of the southern Netherlands to Spain, 1633.
The political severance of the northern and southern Netherlands may be
conveniently dated from the opening of the year 1579. By the signing of
the league of Arras (5th of January) the Walloon "Malcontents" declared
their adherence to the cause of Catholicism and their loyalty to the
Spanish king, and broke away definitely from the northern provinces, who
bound themselves by the union of Utrecht (29th of January) to defend
their rights and liberties, political and religious, against all foreign
potentates. Brabant and Flanders were still indeed under the control of
the prince of Orange and through his influence accepted in 1582 the duke
of Anjou as their sovereign. The French prince was actually inaugurated
duke of Brabant at Antwerp (February 1582) and count of Flanders at
Bruges (July), but his misconduct speedily led to his withdrawal from
the Netherlands, and even before the assassination of Orange (July 1584)
the authority of Philip had been practically restored throughout the two
provinces. This had been achieved by the military skill and
statesmanlike abilities of Alexander Farnese, prince of Parma, appointed
governor-general on the death of Don John of Austria, on the 1st of
October 1578. Farnese first won by promises and blandishments the
confidence of the Walloons, always jealous of the predominance of the
"Flemish" provinces, and then proceeded to make himself master of
Brabant and Flanders by force of arms. In succession Ypres, Mechlin,
Ghent, Brussels, and finally Antwerp (17th of August 1585) fell into his
hands. Philip had in the southern Netherlands attained his object, and
Belgium was henceforth Catholic and Spanish, but at the expense of its
progress and prosperity. Thousands of its inhabitants, and those the
most enterprising and intelligent, fled from the Inquisition, and made
their homes in the Dutch republic or in England. All commerce and
industry was at a standstill; grass grew in the streets of Bruges and
Ghent; and the trade of Antwerp was transferred to Amsterdam. On Parma's
death (3rd of December 1592) the archduke Ernest of Austria was
appointed governor-general, but he died after a short tenure of office
(20th of February 1595) and was at the beginning of 1596 succeeded by
his younger brother the cardinal archduke Albert. Philip was now nearing
his end, and in 1598 he gave his eldest daughter Isabel in marriage to
her cousin the archduke Albert, and erected the Netherlands into a
sovereign state under their joint rule. The advent of the new
sovereigns, officially known as "the archdukes," though greeted with
enthusiasm in the Belgic provinces, was looked upon with suspicion by
the Dutch, who were as firmly resolved as ever to uphold their
independence. The chief military event of the early years of their reign
was the battle of Nieuport (2nd of July 1600), in which Maurice of
Nassau defeated the archduke Albert, and the siege of Ostend, which
after a three years' heroic defence was surrendered (20th of September
1604) to the archduke's general, Spinola. The Dutch, however, being
masters of the sea, kept the coast closely blockaded, and through sheer
exhaustion the king of Spain and the archdukes were compelled to agree
to a truce for twelve years (9th of April 1609) with the United
Provinces "in the capacity of free states over which Albert and Isabel
made no pretensions." During the period of the truce the archdukes, who
were wise and statesmanlike rulers, did their utmost to restore
prosperity to their country and to improve its internal condition.
Unfortunately they were childless, and the instrument of cession of 1598
provided that in case they should die without issue, the Netherlands
should revert to the crown of Spain. This reversion actually took place.
Albert died in 1621, just before the renewal of the war with the Dutch,
and Isabel in 1633. The Belgic provinces therefore passed under the rule
of Philip IV., and were henceforth known as the Spanish Netherlands.
Peace of Munster.
Ruinous consequences of the closing of the Scheldt.
Successive cession of Belgian territory to France.
This connexion with the declining fortunes of Spain was disastrous to
the well-being of the Belgian people, for during many years a close
alliance bound together France and the United Provinces, and the
Southern Netherlands were exposed to attack from both sides, and
constantly suffered from the ravages of hostile armies. The cardinal
archduke Ferdinand, governor-general from 1634-1641, was a capable
ruler, and by his military skill prevented in a succession of campaigns
the forces of the enemy from overrunning the country. On the 30th of
January 1648, Spain concluded a separate peace at Munster with the
Dutch, by which Philip IV. finally renounced all his claims and rights
over the United Provinces, and made many concessions to them. Among
these was the closing of the Scheldt to all ships, a clause which was
ruinous to the commerce of the Belgic provinces, by cutting them off
from their only access to the ocean. Thus they remained for a long
course of years without a sea-port, and in the many wars that broke out
between Spain and France were constantly exposed, as an outlying Spanish
dependency, to the first attack, and peace when it came was usually
purchased at the cost of some part of Belgian territory. By the treaty
of the Pyrenees (1659) Artois (except St Omer and Aire) and a number of
towns in Flanders, Hainaut, and Luxemburg were ceded to France.
Subsequent French conquests, confirmed by the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle
(1668), took away Lille, Douai, Charleroi, Oudenarde, Coutrai and
Tournai. These were, indeed, partly restored to Belgium by the peace of
Nijmwegen (1679); but on the other hand it lost Valenciennes, Nieuport,
St Omer, Ypres and Charlemont, which were only in part recovered by the
peace of Ryswick (1697).
Efforts of the elector of Bavaria to promote trade.
The Spanish succession.
The Grand Alliance.
The internal history of the Belgic provinces has little to record during
this long period in which the ambition of Louis XIV. to possess himself
of the Netherlands, in right of his wife the infanta Maria Theresa (see
SPANISH SUCCESSION), led to a series of invasions and desolating wars.
The French king managed to incorporate a large slice of territory upon
his northern frontier, but his main object was baffled by the steady
resistance and able statesmanship of William III. of England and
Holland. Meanwhile from 1692 onwards brighter prospects were opened out
to the unfortunate Belgians by the nomination by the Spanish king of
Maximilian Emanuel, elector of Bavaria, to be governor-general with
well-nigh sovereign powers. The elector had himself a claim to the
inheritance as the husband of an Austrian archduchess, whose mother, the
infanta Margaret, was the younger sister of the French queen. Maximilian
Emanuel was an able man, who did his utmost to improve the condition of
the country. He attempted to promote trade and restore prosperity to the
impoverished land by the introduction of new customs laws and other
measures, and particularly by the construction of canals to counteract
the damage done to Belgian commerce by the closing of the Scheldt. The
position of the elector was greatly strengthened by the partition treaty
of the 19th of August 1698. Under this instrument the signatory
powers--England, France and Holland--agreed that on the demise of
Charles II. the crown prince of Bavaria under his father's guardianship
should be sovereign of Spain, Belgium and Spanish America. Charles II.
himself shortly afterwards by will appointed the Bavarian prince heir to
all his dominions. The death of the infant heir a few months later (6th
of February 1699) unfortunately destroyed any prospects of a peaceable
settlement of the Spanish Succession. Charles II. was persuaded to name
as his sole successor, Philip duke of Anjou, the second son of the
dauphin, and on his death (on the 1st November 1700) Louis XIV. took
immediate steps to support his grandson's claims, in spite of his formal
renunciation of such claims under the treaty of the Pyrenees. England
and Holland were determined to prevent, however, at all costs the
acquisition of Belgium by a French prince, and a coalition, known as the
Grand Alliance, was formed between these two powers and the empire to
uphold the claims of the archduke Charles, second son of the emperor.
Marlborough's successes.
Peace of Utrecht.
The Austrian Netherlands.
Marquis de Prie in Belgium.
Execution of Francis Anneesens.
Chartered Company of Ostend.
One of the first steps of Louis was to take possession of the
Netherlands. The hereditary feud between the houses of Austria and
Bavaria induced the elector to take the side of France, and he was
nominated by Philip V. vicar-general of the Netherlands. The unhappy
Belgic provinces were again doomed for a number of years to be the
battle-ground of the contending forces, and it was on Belgic soil that
Marlborough won the great victories of Ramillies (1706) and of Oudenarde
(1708), by which he was enabled to drive the French armies out of the
Netherlands and to carry the war into French territory. At the general
peace concluded at Utrecht (11th of April 1713) the long connexion
between Belgium and Spain was severed, and this portion of the
Burgundian inheritance of Charles V. placed under the sovereignty of the
Habsburg claimant, who had, by the death of his brother, become the
emperor Charles VI. The Belgic provinces now came for a full century to
be known as the Austrian Netherlands. Yet such was the dread of France
and the enfeebled state of the country that Holland retained the
privilege, which had been conceded to her during the war, of garrisoning
the principal fortresses or Barrier towns, on the French frontier, and
her right to close the navigation on the Scheldt was again ratified by a
European treaty. The beginnings of Austrian sovereignty were marked by
many collisions between the representatives of the new rulers and the
States General, and provincial "states." Despite their troubled history
and long subjection, the Belgic provinces still retained to an unusual
degree their local liberties and privileges, and more especially the
right of not being taxed, except by the express consent of the states.
The marquis de Prie, who (as deputy for Prince Eugene) was the imperial
governor from 1719 to 1726, encountered on the part of local authorities
and town gilds vigorous resistance to his attempt to rule the
Netherlands as an Austrian dependency, and he was driven to take strong
measures to assert his authority. He selected as his victim a powerful
popular leader at Brussels, Francis Anneesens, syndic of the gild of St
Nicholas, who was beheaded on the 19th of September 1719. His name is
remembered in Belgian annals as a patriot martyr to the cause of
liberty. The administration of de Prie was not, however, without its
redeeming features. He endeavoured to create at Ostend a seaport,
capable in some measure to take the place of Antwerp, and in 1722 a
Chartered Company of Ostend was erected for the purpose of trading in
the East and West Indies (see OSTEND). The determined hostility of the
Dutch rendered the promising scheme futile, and after a precarious
struggle for existence, Charles VI., in order to gain the assent of the
United Provinces and Great Britain to the Pragmatic Sanction (q.v.),
suppressed the Company in 1731.
Archduchess Mary Elizabeth.
Charles of Lorraine.
For sixteen years (1725-1741) the archduchess Mary Elizabeth, sister of
the emperor, filled the post of governor-general. Her rule was marked by
the restoration of the old form of administration under the three
councils, and was a period of general tranquillity. She died (1741) in
the Netherlands, and the empress-queen, Maria Theresa, who had succeeded
under the Pragmatic Sanction to the Burgundian domains of her father
about a year before, appointed her brother-in-law, Charles of Lorraine,
to be governor-general in her aunt's place, and he retained that post,
to the great advantage of Belgium, for nearly forty years. He was
deservedly known as the "Good Governor." The first years of his
administration were stormy. During the Austrian War of Succession the
country was conquered by the French, and for two years Marshal Saxe bore
the title of governor-general, but it was restored to Austria by the
peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (1748). Belgium was undisturbed by the Seven
Years' War (1756-1763), and during the long peace which followed enjoyed
considerable prosperity. Charles of Lorraine thoroughly identified
himself with the best interests of the country, and was the champion of
its liberties, and though he had at times to make a stand against the
imperialistic tendencies of the chancellor Kaunitz, he was able to rely
on the steady support of the empress, who appreciated the wise and
liberal policy of her brother-in-law. Although the Scheldt was still
closed, Charles endeavoured by a large extension of the canal system to
facilitate commercial intercourse, he encouraged agriculture, and was
successful in restoring the prosperity of the country. He also did much
for the advancement of learning, founding, among other institutions,
the Academy of Science, and he consistently restrained the undue
intervention of the church in secular affairs, and placed restrictions
upon the accumulation of property in the hands of religious bodies.
Reforming zeal of Joseph II.
The Brabancon revolt.
The death of Charles of Lorraine preceded only by a few months that of
Maria Theresa, whose son Joseph II. not only appointed his sister, the
archduchess Maria Christine, governor-general, but visited Belgium in
person and showed a great and active interest in its affairs. Here as
elsewhere in his dominions his intentions were excellent, but his
reforming zeal outran discretion, and his hasty and self-opinionated
interferences with treaty rights and traditional privileges ended in
provoking opposition and disaster. Finding the United Provinces hampered
by a war with England, he seized the opportunity to try to get rid of
the impediments placed upon Belgian development by the Barrier and other
treaties with Holland. He was able to compel the Dutch to withdraw their
garrisons from the Barrier towns, but was wholly unsuccessful in his
high-handed attempt to free the navigation of the Scheldt. These efforts
to coerce the Dutch, though marred by partial failure, were, however,
calculated to win for Joseph II. popularity with his Belgian subjects;
but it was far otherwise with his policy of internal reform. He offended
the states by seeking to sweep away many of their inherited privileges
and to change the time-honoured, if somewhat obsolete, system of civil
government. He further excited the religious feelings of the people
against him, by his edict of Tolerance (1780), and his later attempts at
the reform of clerical abuses, which were pronounced to be an infraction
of the Joyous Entry (see JOYEUSE ENTREE). Fierce opposition was aroused.
Numbers of malcontents left the country and organized themselves as a
military force in Holland. As the discontent became more general, the
insurgents returned, took several forts, defeated the Austrians at
Turnhout, and overran the country. On the 11th of December 1789, the
people of Brussels rose against the Austrian garrison, and compelled it
to capitulate, and, on the 27th, the states of Brabant declared their
independence. The other provinces followed and, on the 11th of January
1790, the whole formed themselves into an independent state, under the
name of the "Belgian United States." A few weeks later, on the 20th of
February, Joseph II. died, his end hastened by chagrin at the utter
failure of his well-meant efforts, and was succeeded by Leopold II.
Leopold II. pacifies the country.
Conquest of Belgium by the French.
Union of Holland and Belgium under William I.
The new emperor at once took steps to re-assert, if possible, his
authority in Belgium without having recourse to armed force. He offered
the states, if the people would return to their allegiance, the
restoration of their ancient constitution and a general amnesty. This,
however, did not suit views of the popular party, who, under the
leadership of an advocate named Van der Noot, had possession of the
reins of power, and were uplifted by their success. The terms offered in
an imperial proclamation were rejected, and preparations were made to
resist coercion by the _levee en masse_ of a national army. When,
however, in November 1790, a powerful Austrian force entered the
country, there was practically little opposition to its advance. The
popular leaders fled, the form of government, as it existed at the end
of the reign of Maria Theresa, and an amnesty for past offences was
proclaimed; a superficial pacification of the revolted provinces was
effected, and Austrian rule re-established. It was destined to be
short-lived. In 1792 the armies of revolutionary France assailed Austria
at her weakest point by an invasion of Belgium. The battle of Jemappes
(7th of November) made the French masters of the southern portion of the
Austrian Netherlands; the battle of Fleurus (26th of June 1794) put an
end to the rule of the Habsburgs over the Belgic provinces. The treaty
of Campo Formio (1797) and the subsequent treaty of Luneville (1801)
confirmed the conquerors in the possession of the country, and Belgium
became an integral part of France, being governed on the same footing,
receiving the _Code Napoleon_, and sharing in the fortunes of the
Republic and the Empire. After the fall of Napoleon and the conclusion
of the first peace of Paris (30th of May 1814) Belgium was indeed for
some months placed under the administration of an Austrian
governor-general, but it was shortly afterwards united with Holland to
form the kingdom of the Netherlands. The sovereignty of the newly formed
state was given to the prince of Orange, who mounted the throne (23rd of
March 1815) under the title of William I. The congress of Vienna (31st
of May 1815) determined the relations and fixed the boundaries of the
kingdom; and the new constitution was promulgated on the 24th of August
following, the king taking the oath at Brussels on the 27th of
September.
1814-1830.
Causes of disagreement between Holland and Belgium.
Attitude of the king.
Language question.
Belgian prosperity during the union.
From this date until the Belgian revolt of 1830, the history of Holland
and Belgium is that of two portions of one political entity, but in the
relations of those two portions were to be found from the very outset
fundamental causes tending to disagreement and separation. The Dutch and
Belgian provinces of the Netherlands had for one hundred and thirty
years passed through totally different experiences, and had drifted
farther and farther apart from one another in character, in habits, in
ideas and above all in religion. In the south the policy of Alva and
Philip II. had been wholly successful, and the Belgian people, Flemings
and Walloons alike, were perhaps more devoted to the Catholic faith than
any other in Europe. On the other hand the incorporation of the country
for two decades in the French republic and empire had left deep traces
on a considerable section of the population, the French language was
commonly spoken and was exclusively used in the law courts and in all
public proceedings, and French political theories had made many
converts. The Fundamental Law promulgated by William I. aroused strong
opposition among both the Catholic and Liberal parties in Belgium. The
large powers granted to the king under the new constitution displeased
the Liberals, who saw in its provision only a disguised form of personal
government. The principle of liberty of worship and of the press, which
it laid down, was so offensive to the Catholics that the bishops
condemned it publicly, and in the Doctrinal Judgment actually forbade
their flocks to take the oath. The "close and complete union," which was
stipulated under the treaty of 1814, began under unfavourable auspices.
Nevertheless the difficulties might have been smoothed away in the
course of time, had the Belgians felt that the Dutch were treating them
in a fair and conciliatory spirit. This, despite the undoubtedly good
intentions of the king, was far from being the case. Belgium was
regarded too much in the light of an annexed territory, handed over to
Holland as compensation for the losses sustained by the Dutch in the
revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. The idea that Holland was the
predominant partner in the kingdom of the Netherlands was firmly rooted
in the north and naturally provoked in the south the feeling that
Belgium was being exploited for the benefit of the Dutch. The grievances
of the Belgians were indeed very substantial. The seat of government was
in Holland, the king was a Dutchman by birth and training, and a
Calvinistic protestant by religion. Though the population of Belgium was
3,400,000 and that of Holland only a little more than 2,000,000 the two
countries had equal representation in the second chamber of the
states-general. Practically in all important legislative measures
affecting the interests of the two countries the Dutch government were
able to command a small but permanent majority. The use of the term "the
Dutch Government" is strictly accurate, for the great majority of the
public offices were filled by northerners. In 1830, of the seven members
of the ministry only one was a Belgian; in the home department out of
117 officials 11 only were Belgians; in the ministry of war 3 were
Belgians out of 102; of the officers of the army 288 out of 1967. All
the public establishments, the Bank, the military schools, were Dutch.
That such was the case must not be entirely charged to partiality, still
less to deliberate unfairness on the part of William I. The conduct of
the king proves that he had a most sincere regard for the welfare of his
Belgian subjects, and in his choice of measures and men his aim was to
secure the prosperity of his new kingdom by a policy of unification.
This was the object he had in view in his attempt to make Dutch, except
in the Walloon districts, the official language for all public and
judicial acts, and a knowledge of Dutch a necessary qualification for
every person entering the public service. That the fierce opposition
which this attempt aroused in the Flemish-speaking provinces was
ill-considered and unwise, is shown by the fact that in recent years
there has been a patriotic movement in these same provinces which has
been successful in forcing the Belgian government to adopt Flemish (i.e.
Dutch) as well as French for official usage. This Flemish movement is
all in favour of establishing close relations with the sister people of
the north. Moreover it cannot be gainsaid that Belgium during her union
with Holland enjoyed a degree of prosperity that was quite remarkable.
The mineral wealth of the country was largely developed, the iron
manufactures of Liege made rapid advance, the woollen manufactures of
Verviers received a similar impulse, and many large establishments were
formed at Ghent and other places, where cotton goods were produced which
rivalled those of England and surpassed those of France. The extensive
colonial and foreign trade of the Dutch furnished them with markets,
while the opening of the navigation of the Scheldt raised Antwerp once
more to a place of high commercial importance. The government also did
much in the way of improving the internal communications of the country,
in repairing the roads and canals, in forming new ones, in deepening and
widening rivers, and the like. Nor was the social and intellectual
improvement of the people by any means neglected. A new university was
formed at Liege, normal schools for the instruction of teachers were
instituted, and numerous elementary schools and schools for higher
instruction were established over the country. These measures for the
furthering of education among the people on the part of a government
mainly composed of Protestants were received with suspicion and
disfavour by the priests, and still more the attempts subsequently made
to regulate the education of the priests themselves. The establishment
under the auspices of the king in 1825 of the Philosophical College at
Louvain, and the requirement that every priest before ordination should
spend two years in study there, gave great offence to the clerical
party, and some of the bishops were prosecuted for the violence of their
denunciations at this intrusion of the secular arm into the religious
domain. With the view of terminating these differences the king in 1827
entered into a _concordat_ with the pope, and an agreement was reached
with regard to nominations to bishoprics, clerical education and other
questions, which should have satisfied all reasonable men. But in 1828
the two extreme parties, the Catholic Ultramontanes and the
revolutionary Liberals, in their common hatred to the Dutch regime,
formed an alliance, the _union_, for the overthrow of the government.
Petitions were sent in setting forth the Belgian grievances, demanding a
separate administration for Belgium and a full concession of the
liberties guaranteed by the constitution.
Brussels outbreak of 1830.
Matters were in this state when the news of the success of the July
revolution of 1830 at Paris reached Brussels, at this time a city of
refuge for the intriguing and discontented of almost every country of
Europe. The first outbreak took place on the 25th of August, the
anniversary of the king's accession. An opera called _La Muette_, which
abounds in appeals to liberty, was played, and the audience were so
excited that they rushed out into the street crying, "Imitons les
Parisiens!" A mob speedily gathered together, who proceeded to destroy
or damage a number of public buildings and the private residences of
unpopular officials. The troops were few in number and offered no
opposition to the mob, but a burgher guard was enrolled among the
influential and middle-class citizens for the protection of life and
property. The intelligence of these events in the capital soon spread
through the provinces; and in most of the large towns similar scenes
were enacted, beginning with plunderings and outrages, followed by the
institution of burgher guards for the maintenance of peace. The leading
men of Brussels were most anxious not to push matters to extremities.
They demanded the dismissal of the specially obnoxious minister, Van
Maanen, and a separate administration for Belgium. The government,
however, could not make up their minds what course to pursue, and by
allowing things to drift ended by converting a popular riot into a
national revolt. The heir apparent, the prince of Orange (see WILLIAM
II. of the Netherlands), was sent on a peaceful mission to Brussels, but
furnished with such limited powers, as under the circumstances were
utterly inadequate. He did his best to get at the real facts, and after
a number of conferences with the leaders became so convinced that
nothing but a separate administration of the two countries would restore
tranquillity that he promised to use his influence with his father to
bring about that object--on receiving assurances that the personal union
under the house of Orange would be maintained. The king summoned an
extraordinary session of the states-general, which met at the Hague on
the 13th of September and was opened by a speech from the throne, which
was firm and temperate, but by no means definite. The proceedings were
dilatory, and the attitude of the Dutch deputies exceedingly
exasperating. The result was that the moderate party in Belgium quickly
lost their influence, and those in favour of violent measures prevailed.
Meanwhile although the states were still sitting at the Hague, an army
of 14,000 troops under the command of Prince Frederick, second son of
the king, was gradually approaching Brussels. It was hoped that the
inhabitants would welcome the prince and that a display of armed force
would speedily restore order. After much unnecessary delay, at a time
when prompt action was required, the prince on the 23rd of September
entered Brussels and, with little opposition, occupied the upper or
court portion of it, but when they attempted to advance into the lower
town the troops found the streets barricaded and defended by citizens in
arms. Desultory fighting between the soldiers and the insurgents
continued for three days until, finding that he was making no headway,
the prince ordered a retreat. The news spread like wildfire through the
country, and the principal towns declared for separation. A provisional
government was formed at Brussels, which declared Belgium to be an
independent state, and summoned a national congress to establish a
system of government. King William now did his utmost to avoid a
rupture, and sent the prince of Orange to Antwerp to promise that
Belgium should have a separate administration; but it was too late.
Antwerp was the only important place that remained in the hands of the
Dutch, and the army on retreating from Brussels had fallen back on this
town. At the end of October an insurgent army had arrived before the
gates, which were opened by the populace to receive them, and the
troops, under General Chasse, retired within the citadel. The general
ordered a bombardment of the town for two days, destroying a number of
houses and large quantities of merchandize. This act served still
further to inflame the minds of the Belgians against the Dutch.
Meeting of the National Congress.
The new constitution.
Leopold I., king of the Belgians.
A convention of the representatives of the five great powers met in
London in the beginning of November, at the request of the king of the
Netherlands, and both sides were brought to consent to a cessation of
hostilities. On the 10th of November the National Congress, consisting
of 200 deputies, met at Brussels and came to three important decisions:
(1) the independence of the country--carried unanimously; (2) a
constitutional hereditary monarchy--174 votes against 13; (3) the
perpetual exclusion of the Orange-Nassau family--161 votes against 28.
On the 20th of December the conference of London proclaimed the
dissolution of the kingdom of the Netherlands, but claimed the right of
regulating the conditions under which it should take place. On the 28th
of January 1831, the congress proceeded to the election of a king, and
out of a number of candidates the choice fell on the duke of Nemours,
second son of Louis Philippe, but he declined the office. The congress
then elected Baron Surlet de Chokier to the temporary post of regent,
and proceeded to draw up a constitution on the British parliamentary
pattern. The constitution expressly declared that the king has no powers
except those formally assigned to him. Ministers were to be appointed by
him, but be responsible to the chambers. The legislature was composed of
two chambers--the senate and the chamber of deputies. Both chambers were
elected by the same voters, but senators required a property
qualification,--the payment of at least 2000 florins in taxes. Senators
and deputies received salaries. The franchise was for that time a low
one--every one who paid at least 20 florins in taxes had a vote. The
choice of a king was more difficult than that of drawing up a
constitution. It was desirable that the new sovereign should be able to
count upon the friendly support of the great powers, and yet not be
actually a member of their reigning dynasties. It was from fear of
arousing the susceptibilities of neighbouring states, especially Great
Britain, that Louis Philippe had refused to sanction the election of his
son. It was for this reason that the name of Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, the
widower of Princess Charlotte of England, had not been placed among the
candidates in January. Overtures were, however, made to him, as soon as
it was understood that, as the result of private negotiations at the
London conference, the selection of this prince would be favourably
received both by Great Britain and France. Leopold signified his
readiness to accept the crown after having first ascertained that he
would have the support of the great powers in bringing about a
satisfactory settlement with Holland on those points which he considered
essential to the security and welfare of the new kingdom. The election
took place on the 4th of June, when 152 votes out of 196, four being
absent, determined that Leopold should be proclaimed king of the
Belgians, under the express condition that he "would accept the
constitution and swear to maintain the national independence and
territorial integrity." Leopold made his public entry into Brussels, on
the 21st, and subsequently visited other parts of the kingdom, and was
everywhere received with demonstrations of loyalty and respect.
At this juncture news suddenly arrived that the Dutch were preparing to
invade the country with a large army. It comprised 45,000 infantry and
6000 cavalry with 72 pieces of artillery, while Leopold could scarcely
bring forward 25,000 men to oppose it. On the 2nd of August the whole of
the Dutch army had crossed the frontier; Leopold collected his forces,
such as they were, near Louvain in order to cover his capital. The two
armies met on the 9th of August. The undisciplined Belgians, despite the
personal efforts of their king, were speedily routed, and Leopold and
his staff narrowly escaped capture. He, however, made good his retreat
to the capital, and, on the advance of a French army, the prince of
Orange did not deem it prudent to push on farther. A convention was
concluded between him and the French general, in consequence of which he
returned to Holland and the French likewise recrossed the frontier.
Leopold now proceeded with vigour to strengthen his position and to
restore order and confidence. French officers were selected for the
training and disciplining of the army, the civil list was arranged with
economy and order, and reforms were introduced into the public service
and system of administration. He kept on the best of terms, though a
Protestant, with the Roman Catholic clergy and nobility, and his
subsequent marriage with the daughter of the French king (9th of August
1832), and the contract that the children of the marriage should be
brought up in the Roman Catholic faith, did much to inspire confidence
in his good intentions.
The treaty of separation.
Meanwhile the conference in London had drawn up the project of a treaty
for the separation of Holland and Belgium, which was declared "to be
final and irrevocable." The conditions were far less favourable to
Belgium than had been hoped, and it was not without much heart-burning
and considerable opposition, that the senate and chamber of deputies
gave their assent to them. The treaty, which contained 24 articles, was
signed on the 15th of November 1831. By these articles the grand-duchy
of Luxemburg was divided, but the king of Holland retained possession of
the fortress of Luxemburg, and also received a portion of Limburg to
compensate him for the part of Luxemburg assigned to Belgium. The
district of Maestricht was likewise partitioned, but the fortress
remained Dutch. The Scheldt was declared open to the commerce of both
countries. The national debt was divided. The powers recognized the
independence of Belgium, "as a neutral state."
The French besiege Antwerp.
The Luxemburg question.
Final settlement between Holland and Belgium.
This agreement was ratified by the Belgian and French sovereigns on the
20th and 24th of November, by the British on the 6th of December, but
the Austrian and Prussian and Russian governments, whose sympathies were
with the "legitimate" King William rather than with a prince who owed
his crown to a revolution, did not give their ratification till some
five months later. Even then King William remained obdurate, refused to
sign and continued to keep possession of Antwerp. After fruitless
efforts on the part of the great powers to obtain his acquiescence,
France and Great Britain resolved to have recourse to force. On the 5th
of November their combined fleets sailed for the coast of Holland, and,
on the 18th, a French army of 60,000 men, under the command of Marshal
Gerard, crossed the Belgian frontier to besiege Antwerp. The Dutch
garrison capitulated on the 23rd of December, and on the 31st the town
was handed over to the Belgians, and the French troops withdrew across
the frontier. The Dutch, however, still held two forts, which enabled
them to command the navigation of the Scheldt, and these they stubbornly
refused to yield. Belgium therefore kept possession of Limburg and
Luxemburg, except the fortress of Luxemburg, which as a fortress of the
German confederation was, under the terms of the treaty of Vienna,
garrisoned by Prussian troops. These territories were treated in every
way as a part of Belgium, and sent representatives to the chambers.
Great indignation was therefore felt at the idea of giving them up, when
Holland (14th of March 1838) signified its readiness to accept the
conditions of the treaty. The chambers argued that Belgium had been
induced to agree to the twenty-four articles in 1832 in the hope of
thereby at once terminating all harassing disputes, but as Holland
refused then to accept them, the conditions were no longer binding and
the circumstances were now quite changed. They urged that Luxemburg in
fact formed an integral part of Belgium and that the people were totally
opposed to a union with Holland. They offered to pay for the territory
in dispute, but the treaty gave them no right of purchase, and the
proposal was not entertained. Addresses were unanimously voted urging
the king to resist separation, great excitement was aroused throughout
the country and preparations were made for war. But the firmness of the
allied powers and their determination to uphold the condtions of the
treaty compelled the king most reluctantly to submit to the inevitable.
The treaty was signed in London on the 19th of April 1839. It saddled
Belgium with a portion of Holland's debt, and a severe financial crisis
followed.
Struggle between the Catholics and Liberals.
Electoral reform.
The Belgian revolution owed its success to the union of the Catholic and
Liberal parties; and the king had been very careful to maintain the
alliance between them. This continued to be the character of the
government till 1840, but by degrees it had been growing more and more
conservative, and was giving rise to dissatisfaction. A ministry was
formed on more liberal principles, but it clashed with the Catholic
aristocracy, who had the majority in the senate. A neutral ministry
under M. Charles Nothomb was then formed. In 1842 it carried a new law
of primary instruction, which aroused the dislike of the anti-clerical
Liberals. The Nothomb ministry retired in 1845. In March 1846 the king
formed a purely Catholic ministry, but it was fiercely attacked by the
Liberals, who had for several years been steadily organizing. A congress
was summoned to meet at Brussels (14th of June 1846) composed of
delegates from the different Liberal associations throughout the
country. Three hundred and twenty delegates met and drew up an Act of
Federation and a programme of reforms. The election of 1847 gave a
majority to the Liberals and a purely Liberal ministry was formed, and
from this date onwards it has been the constitutional practice in
Belgium to choose a homogeneous ministry from the party which possesses
a working majority in the chamber. In 1848 a new electoral law was
passed, which lowered the franchise to 20 florins' worth of property and
doubled the number of electors. Hence it came to pass that Belgium
passed safely through the crisis of the French revolution of 1848. The
extreme democratic and socialistic party made with French aid some
spasmodic efforts to stir up a revolutionary movement, but they met with
no popular sympathy; the throne of Leopold stood firmly based upon the
trust and respect of the Belgian nation for the wisdom and moderation of
their king.
The attention of the government was now largely directed to the
stimulating of private industry and the carrying out of public works of
great practical utility, such as the extension of railways and the
opening up of other internal means of communication. Commercial treaties
were also entered into with various countries with the view of providing
additional outlets for industrial products. The king also sought as much
as possible to remove from the domain of politics every irritating
question, believing that a union of the different parties was most for
the advantage of the state. In 1850 the question of middle-class
education was settled. In 1852 the Liberal cabinet was overthrown and a
ministry of conciliation was formed. A bill was passed authorizing the
army to be raised to 100,000 men including reserve. The elections of
1854 modified the parliamentary situation by increasing the strength of
the Conservatives; the ministry resigned and a new one was formed, under
Pierre de Decker, of moderate Catholics and Progressives. In 1857 the
government of M. de Decker brought in a bill to establish "the liberty
of charity," but in reality to place the administration of charities in
the hands of the priesthood. This led to a violent agitation throughout
the kingdom and the military had to be called out. Eventually the bill
was withdrawn, the ministers resigned and a Liberal ministry was formed
under M. Charles Rogier. In 1860 the communal _octrois_ or duties on
articles of food brought into the towns was abolished; in 1863 the
navigation of the Scheldt was made free, and a treaty of commerce
established with England. The elections of July 1864 gave a majority to
the Liberals, and M. Rogier continued in office.
Accession of Leopold II.
On the 10th of December 1865, King Leopold died, after a reign of
thirty-four years. He was greatly beloved by his people, and to him
Belgium owed much, for in difficult circumstances and critical times he
had managed its affairs with great tact and judgment. He was succeeded
by his eldest son Leopold II., who was immediately proclaimed king and
took the oath to the constitution on the 17th of December. On the
outbreak of war between France and Germany in 1870, Belgium saw the
difficulty and danger of her position, and lost no time in providing for
contingencies. A large war credit was voted, the strength of the army
was raised and strong bodies of troops were moved to the frontier. The
feeling of danger to Belgium also caused great excitement in England.
The British government declared its intention to maintain the integrity
of Belgium in accordance with the treaty of 1839, and it induced the two
belligerent powers to agree not to violate the neutrality of Belgian
territory. A considerable portion of the French army routed at Sedan did
indeed seek refuge across the frontier; but they laid down their arms
according to convention, and were duly "interned."
The Flemish Movement.
In 1870 the Liberal party, which had been in power for thirteen years,
was overthrown by a union of the Catholics with a number of Liberal
dissentients to whom the policy of the government had given offence, and
a Catholic cabinet, at the head of which was Baron Jules Joseph
d'Anethan, took office. At the election of August 1870, the Catholics
obtained a majority in both chambers. They increased their power
considerably by reducing the voting qualification for electors to
provincial councils to 20 frs., and to communal councils to 10 frs., and
also by recognizing the importance of what was styled "the Flemish
Movement." Hitherto French had been the official language of the states.
The use of Flemish in public documents, in judicial procedure and in
official correspondence was hereafter required in the Flemish provinces,
and Belgium became officially bi-lingual. It was, as has been already
pointed out, a reversion to the policy of the Dutch king, which in 1830
had been so strongly denounced by the leaders of the Belgian revolution,
and its object was the same, i.e. to prevent _frenchification_ of a
population that was Teutonic by race and speech. In 1871 M. Malou had
become the head of a cabinet of moderate Catholics, and he retained
office till 1878. This was the period of the struggle between the pope
and the Italian government, and the German _Kulturkampf_. The Belgian
Ultramontanes agitated strongly in favour of the re-establishment of the
temporal power and against the policy of Bismarck. Though
discountenanced by the ministry, the violence of the Ultra-clericals
compassed its downfall. They passed a law adopting the ballot in 1877,
but at the election of the following year a Liberal majority was
returned.
School law of 1879.
The new cabinet, under M. Frere-Orban, devoted itself solely to the
settlement of the educational system. Hitherto since 1842 in all primary
schools instruction by the clergy in the Catholic faith was obligatory,
children belonging to other persuasions being dispensed from attendance.
In 1879 a bill was passed for the secularization of primary education;
but an attempt was made to conciliate the clergy by Art. 4, which
enacted--"religious instruction is relegated to the care of families and
the clergy of the various creeds. A place in the school may be put at
their disposal where the children may receive religious instruction," at
hours other than those set apart for regular education. The bill
likewise provided for a rigorous inspection of the communal schools. The
passing of this law was met by the clergy by uncompromising resistance.
The bishops ordered that absolution be refused to teachers in the
schools "sans Dieu," and to the parents who sent their children to them,
and urged the establishment of private Catholic schools. All over
Belgium the agitation spread, and the clergy, who were practically
independent of state control, gained the victory. In November 1879 it
was calculated that there were but 240,000 scholars in the secularized
schools against 370,000 in the Catholic schools. In Flanders over 80% of
the children attended the Catholic schools. The government appealed to
the pope, but the Holy See declined to take any action, and so great was
the embitterment that the Belgian minister at the Vatican and the papal
nuncio at Brussels were recalled, and in 1880 the clergy refused to
associate themselves with the fetes of the national jubilee. In order to
emerge victorious in such a struggle the Liberal party had need of all
their strength, but a split took place between the sections known as the
_doctrinaires_ and the _progressists_, on the question of an extension
of the franchise, and at the election of 1884 the Catholics carried all
before them at the polls. From 1884 up to the present time the clerical
party have maintained their supremacy.
Social outbreak in 1886.
Agitation for a revision of the constitution.
The Nyssens compromise.
A Catholic administration under M. Malou at once took in hand the
schools question. A law was passed, despite violent protests from the
Liberals, which enacted that the communes might maintain the private
Catholic schools established since 1879 and suppress unsectarian schools
at their pleasure. They might retain at least one unsectarian or adopt
one Catholic school, where 25 heads of families demanded it. The state
subsidized all the communal schools, Catholic and unsectarian alike.
Under this law in all districts under clerical control the unsectarian
schools were abolished. In October 1884, M. Beernaert replaced M. Malou
as prime minister, and retained that post for the following ten years.
He had in 1886 a troublous and dangerous situation to deal with.
Socialism had become a political force in the land. Socialism of a
German type had taken deep root among the working men of the Flemish
towns, especially at Ghent and Brussels; socialism of a French
revolutionary type among the Walloon miners and factory hands. On the
18th of March 1886, a socialist rising suddenly burst out at Liege, on
the occasion of the anniversary of the Paris Commune, and rapidly
spread in other industrial centres of the Walloon districts. Thousands
of workmen went on strike, demanding better wages and the suffrage. The
ministry acted promptly and with vigour, the outbreak was suppressed by
the employment of the military and order was restored. But as soon as
this was accomplished the government opened a comprehensive enquiry into
the causes of dissatisfaction, which served as the basis of numerous
social laws, and led eventually to the establishment of universal
suffrage and the substitution in Belgium of a democratic for a
middle-class regime. It was not effected till several years had been
spent in long parliamentary discussions, by demonstrations on the part
of the supporters of franchise revision and by strikes of a political
tendency. At last the senate and chamber declared, May 1892, that the
time for a revision of certain articles of the constitution had come. As
prescribed by the constitution, a dissolution took place and two new
chambers were elected. The Catholics had a majority in both, but not
enough to enable them to dispense with the assistance of the Liberals,
the constitution requiring for every revision a two-thirds majority. The
bills proposed for extending the franchise were all rejected (April 11th
and 12th). Thereupon the council of the Labour party proclaimed a
general strike. Fifty thousand workmen struck, in Brussels there were
violent demonstrations, and the agitation assumed generally a dangerous
aspect. Both the government and the opposition in the chambers saw that
delay vas impossible, and that revision must be carried out. Agreement
was reached by the acceptance of a compromise proposed by M. Albert
Nyssens, Catholic deputy and professor of penal procedure and commercial
law at the university of Louvain, and on the 18th of April the chamber
adopted an electoral system until then unknown--_le suffrage universel
plural_. The citizen in order to possess a vote for the election of
representatives to the chambers was to be of a _minimum_ age of
twenty-five years, and of thirty years for the election of senators and
provincial and communal councillors. For the four categories of
elections a supplementary vote was given to (a) citizens who having
attained the age of thirty-five years, and being married or widowers
with children, paid at least 5 f. income tax, and (b) to citizens of the
age of twenty-five years possessing real estate to the value of 2000 f.
or Belgian state securities yielding an income of at least 100 f. Two
supplementary votes were bestowed upon citizens having certain
educational certificates, or discharging functions or following
professions implying their possession. This elaborate system was only
carried into law after considerable and violent opposition in the
sessions of 1894 and 1895. It was chiefly the work of the ministry of M.
de Burlet, who succeeded to the place of M. Beernaert in March 1894.
Catholic majority of 1894.
Proportional representation.
The composition of the elected bodies for the years 1894-1895 was:--for
the chamber of representatives 1,354,891 electors with 2,085,605 votes,
for the senate and provincial councils 1,148,433 electors with 1,856,838
votes. The result of the first election in October 1894 was to give the
Catholic party an overwhelming majority. The old Liberal party almost
disappeared, while the Walloon provinces returned a number of
Socialists. In February 1896 M. de Burlet, being in bad health,
transferred the direction of the government to M. Smet de Naeyer. The
election of 1894 had given the Liberals a much smaller number of seats
than they ought to have had according to the number of votes they
polled, and a cry arose for the establishment of proportional
representation. Both sides felt that reform was again necessary, but the
Catholic majority disagreed among themselves as to the form it should
take. In 1899 M. Smet de Naeyer gave place as head of the ministry to M.
van den Peereboom. But the proposals of the latter met with organized
obstruction on the part of the Socialist deputies, and after a few
months' tenure of office he gave way to M. Smet de Naeyer once more. The
new cabinet at once (August 1899) introduced a bill giving complete
proportional representation in parliamentary elections to all the
arrondissements, and it was passed despite the defection of a number of
Catholic deputies led by M. Woeste. The election in May 1900 resulted in
the return of a substantial (though reduced) Catholic majority in both
chambers.
Social legislation.
During this period of Catholic ascendancy social legislation was not
neglected. Among the enactments the following are the most
important:--the institution of industrial and labour councils, composed
of employers and employes, and of a superior council, formed of
officials, workmen and employers (1887); laws assisting the erection of
workmen's dwellings and supervising the labour of women and children
(1889); laws for ameliorating the system of Friendly Societies (1890);
laws regulating workshops (1896); conferring corporate rights on trades'
unions (1898); guaranteeing the security and health of working men
during hours of labour (1899). In 1900 laws were passed regulating the
contract of labour, placing the workman on a footing of perfect equality
with his employer, assuring the married woman free control of her
savings, and organizing a system of old-age pensions. Primary education
was dealt with in 1895 by a law, which made religious instruction
obligatory, and extended state support to all schools that satisfied
certain conditions. In 1899 there were in Belgium 6674 subsidized
schools, having 775,000 scholars out of a total of 950,000 children of
school age. Only 68,000 did not receive religious instruction. The
Catholic party also strove to mitigate the principle of obligatory
military service by encouraging the system of volunteering and by a
reduction of the time of active service and of the number with the
colours.
Politics in 1905.
In 1905 the 75th anniversary of Belgian independence was celebrated, and
there was a great manifestation of loyalty to King Leopold II. for the
wisdom and prudence shown by him during his long reign. Owing to
dissensions among the Catholic and Conservative party on the subject of
military service and the fortification of Antwerp, their majority in the
chamber in 1904 fell from 26 to 20, that in the senate from 16 to 12.
The partial election in 1906 reduced the majority in the chamber to 12,
while the partial election in 1908 brought the majority down to 8. The
Smet de Naeyer ministry which had held office since 1900 was defeated in
April 1907 in a debate on the mining law over the proposal concerning
the length of the working day. A new cabinet was formed on the 2nd of
May following under the presidency of M. de Trooz, who had been minister
of the interior under M. Smet de Naeyer, and who retained that portfolio
in conjunction with the premiership. M. de Trooz died on the 31st of
December 1907, and was succeeded by M. Schollaert, president of the
chamber. The count of Flanders, brother of the king, died on the 17th of
November 1905, leaving his son Albert heir to the throne.
Belgium and the Congo.
The Congo question had meanwhile become an acute one in Belgium. The
personal interest taken by Leopold II. in the exploration and commercial
development of the equatorial regions of Africa had led, in the creation
of the Congo Free State, to results which had originally not been
anticipated. The _Comite des Etudes du Haut Congo_, formed in 1878 at
the instance of the king and mainly financed by him had developed into
the International Association of the Congo, of which a Belgian officer,
Colonel M. Strauch, was president. Through the efforts in Africa of H.M.
Stanley a rudimentary state was created, and through the efforts of King
Leopold in Europe the International Association was recognized during
1884-1885 by the powers as an independent state. Declarations to this
effect were exchanged between the Belgian government and the Association
on the 23rd of February 1885. In April of the same year the Belgian
chambers authorized the king to be the chief of the state founded by the
Association, which had already taken the name of _Etat Independent du
Congo_. The union between Belgium and the new state was declared to be
purely personal, but its European headquarters were in Brussels, its
officials, in the course of time, became almost exclusively Belgian, and
financially and commercially the connexion between the two countries
became increasingly close. In 1889 King Leopold announced that he had
by his will bequeathed the Congo state to Belgium, and in 1890 the
Belgian government, in return for financial help, acquired the right of
annexing the country under certain conditions. At later dates definite
proposals for immediate annexation were considered but not adopted, the
king showing a strong disinclination to cede the state, while among the
mass of the Belgians the disinclination to annex was equally strong. It
was not until terrible reports as to the misgovernment of the Congo
created a strong agitation for reform in Great Britain, America and
other countries responsible for having aided in the creation of the
state, that public opinion in Belgium seriously concerned itself with
the subject. The result was that in November 1907 a new treaty of
cession was presented to the Belgian chambers, while in March 1908 an
additional act modified one of the most objectionable features of the
treaty--a clause by which the king retained control of the revenue of a
vast territory within the Congo which he had declared to be his private
property. A colonial law, also submitted to the chambers, secured for
Belgium in case of annexation complete parliamentary control over the
Congo state, and the bill for annexation was finally passed in September
1908.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Th. Juste, _Histoire de la Belgique_ (2 vols., 1853);
_La Revolution belge de 1830_ (2 vols., 1872); _Congres national de
Belgique_ (2 vols., 1880); _Memoirs of Leopold I._ (2 vols., 1868); De
Gerlache, _Histoire du royaume des Pays-Bas_ (3 vols., 1859); D.C.
Boulger, _The History of Belgium_, part i. (1900); C. White, _The
Belgic Revolution of 1830_ (2 vols., 1835); Moke and Hubert, _Histoire
de Belgique_ (_jusque 1885_) (1892); L. Hymans, _Histoire
parlementaire de la Belgique_ (1830-1899); _Cinquante ans de liberte_
(4 vols., 1881); J.J. Thonissen _La Belgique sous le regne de Leopold
I^{er}_ (4 vols., 1855-1858); De Laveleye, _Le Parti clerical en
Belgique_ (1874); Vandervelde and Destree, _Le Socialisme belge_
(1898); C. Woeste, _Vingt ans de polemique_ (1890); Hamelius, _Le
Mouvement flamand_ (1894). (G. E.)