Chapter IV: , VII (190)

"In 1645, Orleans led the [French] army into Flanders, and
began the campaign with the capture of Mardyck. A few weeks of
leisurely siege resulted in the conquest of some towns, and by
the first of September Gaston sought rest at the Court. As it
was now well towards the end of the season, the Hollanders
were at last ready to cooperate, and they joined the French
under Gassion and Rantzau. But the allied armies did little
except march and countermarch, and at the end of the year the
Spaniards surprised the French garrison at Mardyck and retook
the only place of importance they had lost. … Gaston was,
however, well content even with the moderate glory of such
warfare. In 1646 he commanded an army of 35,000 men, one
portion of which was led by Enghien himself. The Hollanders
were under arms unusually early, but they atoned for this by
accomplishing nothing. The French laid siege to Courtrai,
which in due time surrendered, and they then spent three weeks
in a vigorous siege of Mardyck.
{2281}
This place was finally captured for the second time in
fourteen months. It was now late in August, and Orleans was
ready to rest from a campaign which had lasted three months.
… By the departure of Gaston the Duke of Enghien was left
free to attempt some important movement, and his thoughts
turned upon the capture of the city of Dunkirk. Dunkirk was
situated on the shore of the North Sea, in a position that
made it alike important and formidable to commerce. … Its
harbor leading to a canal in the city where a fleet might
safely enter, and its position near the shores of France and
the British Channel, had rendered it a frequent retreat for
pirates. The cruisers that captured the ships of the merchants
of Havre and Dieppe, or made plundering expeditions along the
shores of Picardy and Normandy, found safe refuge in the
harbor of Dunkirk. Its name was odious through northern
France, alike to the shipper and the resident of the towns
along the coast. The ravages of the pirates of Dunkirk are
said to have cost France as much as a million a year. … The
position of Dunkirk was such that it seemed to defy attack,
and the strangeness and wildness of its approaches added
terror to its name. It was surrounded by vast plains of sand,
far over which often spread the waters of the North Sea, and
its name was said to signify the church of the dunes. Upon
them the fury of the storms often worked strange changes. What
had seemed solid land would be swallowed up in some tempest.
What had been part of the ocean would be left so that men and
wagons could pass over what the day before had been as
inaccessible as the Straits of Dover. An army attempting a
siege would find itself on these wild dunes far removed from
any places for supplies, and exposed to the utmost severity of
storm and weather. Tents could hardly be pitched, and the
changing sands would threaten the troops with destruction. The
city was, moreover, garrisoned by 3,000 soldiers, and by 3,000
of the citizens and 2,000 sailors. … The ardor of Enghien
was increased by these difficulties, and he believed that with
skill and vigor the perils of a siege could be overcome. This
plan met the warm approval of Mazarin. … Enghien advanced
with his army of about 15,000 men, and on the 10th of
September the siege began. It was necessary to prevent
supplies being received by sea. Tromp, excited to hearty
admiration of the genius of the young general, sailed with ten
ships into the harbor, and cut off communications. Enghien, in
the meantime, was pressing the circumvallation of the city
with the utmost vigor. … Half fed, wet, sleepless, the men
worked on, inspired by the zeal of their leader. Piccolomini
attempted to relieve the city, but he could not force
Enghien's entrenchments, except by risking a pitched battle,
and that he did not dare to venture. Mines were now carried
under the city by the besiegers, and a great explosion made a
breach in the wall. The French and Spanish met, but the smoke
and confusion were so terrible that both sides at last fell
back in disorder. The French finally discovered that the
advantage was really theirs, and held the position. Nothing
now remained but a final and bloody assault, but Leyde did not
think that honor required him to await this. He agreed that if
he did not receive succor by the 10th of October, the city
should be surrendered. Piccolomini dared not risk the last
army in Flanders in an assault on Enghien's entrenchments,
and, on October 11th, the Spanish troops evacuated the town. A
siege of three weeks had conquered obstacles of man and
nature, and destroyed the scourge of French commerce."

_J. B. Perkins,
France under [Richelieu and] Mazarin,
chapter 8 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_Lord Mahon,
Life of Condé,
chapter 2._

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1646-1648.
Final Negotiation of Peace between Spain and the
United Provinces.

"The late campaign had been so unfortunate [to the Spaniards]
that they felt their only possibility of obtaining reasonable
terms, or of continuing the war with the hope of a change in
fortune, was to break the alliance between Holland and
France. A long debt of gratitude, assistance rendered in the
struggle with Spain when assistance was valuable, the treaty
of 1635 renewed in 1644, forbade Holland making a peace,
except jointly with France. On the other hand, the
States-General were weary of war, and jealous of the power and
ambition of the French. … This disposition was skilfully
fostered by the Spanish envoys. Pau and Knuyt,
plenipotentiaries from Holland to the Congress at Münster
[where, in part, the negotiations of the Peace of Westphalia
were in progress—see GERMANY: A. D. 1648], were gained to the
Spanish interest, as Mazarin claimed, by the promise to each
of 100,000 crowns. But, apart from bribes, the Spanish used
Mazarin's own plans to alarm the Hollanders. … It was
intimated to the Hollanders that France was about to make a
separate peace, that the Spanish Netherlands were to be given
her, and that perhaps with the hand of the infanta might be
transferred what claims Spain still made on the allegiance of
the United Provinces. The French protested in vain they had
never thought of making any treaty unless Holland joined, and
that the proposed marriage of Louis with the infanta had been
idle talk, suggested by the Spanish for the purpose of
alarming the States-General. The Hollanders were suspicious,
and they became still more eager for peace. … In the spring
of 1646, seventy-one proposed articles had been submitted to
the Spanish for their consideration. The French made repeated
protests against these steps, but the States-General insisted
that they were only acting with such celerity as should enable
them to have the terms of their treaty adjusted as soon as
those of the French. The successes of 1646 and the capture of
Dunkirk quickened the desires of the United Provinces for a
treaty with their ancient enemy. … In December, 1646,
articles were signed between Spain and Holland, to be inserted
in the treaty of Münster, when that should be settled upon,
though the States-General still declared that no peace should
be made unless the terms were approved by France. Active
hostilities were again commenced in 1647, but little progress
was made in Flanders during this campaign. Though the
Hollanders had not actually made peace with Spain, they gave
the French no aid. … On January 30, 1648, the treaty was at
last signed. 'One would think,' wrote Mazarin, 'that for
eighty years France had been warring with the provinces, and
Spain had been protecting them. They have stained their
reputation with a shameful blemish.'
{2282}
It was eighty years since William of Orange had issued his
proclamation inviting all the Netherlands to take up arms 'to
oppose the violent tyranny of the Spaniards.' Unlike the truce
of 1609, a formal and final peace was now made. The United
Provinces were acknowledged as free and sovereign states. At
the time of the truce the Spaniards had only treated with them
'in quality of, and as holding them for independent
provinces.' By a provision which had increased the eagerness
for peace of the burghers and merchants of the United
Provinces, it was agreed that the Escaut [Scheldt] should be
closed. The wealth and commerce of Antwerp were thus
sacrificed for the benefit of Amsterdam. The trade with the
Indies was divided between the two countries. Numerous
commercial advantages were secured and certain additional
territory was ceded to the States-General."

_J. B. Perkins,
France under [Richelieu and] Mazarin,
chapter 8 (volume 1)._

"It had … become a settled conviction of Holland that a
barrier of Spanish territory between the United Provinces and
France was necessary as a safeguard against the latter. But
the idea of fighting to maintain that barrier had not yet
arisen, though fighting was the outcome of the doctrine. All
that the United Provinces now did, or could do, was simply to
back out of the war with Spain, sit still, and look passively
upon the conflict between her and France for possession of the
barrier, until it should please the two belligerents to make
peace."

_J. Geddes,
History of the Administration of John De Witt,
book 2, chapter 1, section 1 (volume 1)._

NETHERLANDS: (Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1647-1648.
The Spanish war with France.
Siege and Battle of Lens.

"While Condé was at the head of the army of the Netherlands,
it at least suffered no disaster; but, while he was affording
the enemy a triumph in Spain [by his failure at Lerida,—the
army which he left behind him was equally unfortunate].

See SPAIN: A. D. 1644-1646.

As he had taken some regiments with him to Spain, it did not
exceed 16,000 men; and in 1647 was commanded by the two
marshals, Gassion and Rantzau," who exercised the command on
alternate days. Both were brave and skilful officers, but they
were hostile to one another, and Rantzau was, unfortunately, a
drunkard. "The Spanish army had been raised to 22,000 men, and
besides being superior in numbers to them, was now under the
command of a singularly active leader, the Archduke Leopold.
He took town after town before their face; and towards the end
of June laid siege to Landrecies. The danger of so important a
place stimulated Mazarin to send some strong battalions,
including the royal guards, to reinforce the army: and the two
marshals made skilful dispositions to surprise the Spanish
camp. By a night march of great rapidity, they reached the
neighbourhood of the enemy without their presence being
suspected; but the next morning, when the attack was to be
made, it was Rantzau's turn to command; and he was too
helplessly drunk to give the necessary orders. Before he had
recovered his consciousness daylight had revealed his danger
to the archduke, and he had taken up a position in which he
could give battle with advantage. Greatly mortified, the
French were forced to draw off, and leave Landrecies to its
fate. As some apparent set-off to their losses, they succeeded
in taking Dixmude, and one or two other unimportant towns, and
were besieging Lens, when Gassion was killed; and though, a
few days afterwards, that town was taken, its capture made but
small amends. … Though the war was almost at an end in
Germany, Turenne was still in that country; and, therefore,
the next year there was no one who could be sent to replace
Gassion but Condé and Grammont, who fortunately for the
prince, was his almost inseparable comrade and adviser. …
Though 16,000 men had been thought enough for Gassion and
Rantzau, 30,000 were now collected to enable Condé to make a
more successful campaign. The archduke had received no
reinforcements, and had now only 18,000 men to make head
against him; yet with this greatly inferior force he, for a
while, balanced Condé's successes; losing Ypres, it is true,
but taking Courtrai and Furnes, and defeating and almost
annihilating a division with which the prince had detached
Rantzau to make an attempt upon Ostend. At last, in the middle
of August, he laid siege to Lens, the capture of which had, as
we have already mentioned, been the last exploit of the French
army in the preceding campaign, and which was now retaken
without the garrison making the slightest effort at
resistance. But, just as the first intelligence of his having
sat down before it reached Condé, he was joined by the Count
d'Erlach with a reinforcement of 5,000 men from the German
army; and he resolved to march against the archduke in the
hope of saving" the place. "He arrived in sight of the town on
the 20th of August, a few hours after it had surrendered; and
he found the archduke's victorious army in a position which,
eager as he was for battle, he could not venture to attack.
For Leopold had 18,000 men under arms, and the force that
Condé had been able to bring with him did not exceed 14,000,
with 18 guns. For the first time in his life he decided on
retreating;" but early in the retreat his army was thrown into
disorder by an attack from the archduke's cavalry, commanded
by General Beck. "All was nearly lost, when Grammont turned
the fortune of the day. He was in the van, but the moment that
he learnt what was taking place behind him, he halted the
advanced guard, and leading it back towards the now triumphant
enemy, gave time for those regiments which had been driven in
to rally behind the firm line which he presented. … It soon
came to be a contest of hard fighting, unvaried by manœuvres
on either side; and in hard fighting no troops could stand
before those who might be lead by Condé. … At last victory
declared for him in every part of his line. He had sustained a
heavy loss himself, but less than that of the enemy, who left
3,000 of their number slain upon the field; while 5,000
prisoners, among whom was Beck himself, struck down by a
mortal wound, and nearly all their artillery and baggage,
attested the reality and greatness of his triumph."

_C. D. Yonge,
History of France under the Bourbons,
chapter 10 (volume 2)._

ALSO IN:
_Sir E. Cust,
Lives of the Warriors of the Civil Wars,
part 1, pages 149-152._

{2283}

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1647-1650.
Suspension of the Stadtholdership.
Supremacy of the States of Holland.

The fourth stadtholder, William II., who succeeded his father,
Frederick Henry, in 1647, "was young and enterprising, and not at
all disposed to follow the pacific example of his father. …
His attempt at a coup d'état only prepared the way for an
interregnum. … He was brother-in-law to the Elector of
Brandenburg … and son-in-law to Charles I. of England and
Henrietta Maria, the sister of Louis XIII. … The proud
descendant of the Stuarts, the Princess Mary, who had been
married to him when hardly more than a child, thought it
beneath her not to be the wife of a sovereign, and encouraged
her husband not to be satisfied to remain merely 'the official
of a republic.' Thus encouraged, the son of Frederick Henry
cherished the secret purpose of transforming the elective
stadtholdership into an hereditary monarchy. … He needed
supreme authority to enable him to render assistance to
Charles I. … Finding in the opposition of the States an
insurmountable obstacle to his wish of intervention, he sought
the support of France, … and was now ready to come to an
understanding with Mazarin to break the treaty of Munster and
wrest the Netherlands from Spain. Mazarin promised in return
to help him to assert his authority over the States. … But
if William desired war, the United Provinces, and in
particular the province of Holland, could not dispense with
peace. … The States of Holland … fixed the period for the
disbanding of the twenty-nine companies whose dismissal had
been promised to them. After twelve days of useless
deliberations they issued definite orders to that effect. The
step had been provoked, but it was precipitate and might give
rise to a legal contest as to their competency. The Prince of
Orange, therefore, eager to hasten a struggle from which he
expected an easy victory, chose to consider the resolution of
the States of Holland as a signal for the rupture of the
Union, and the very next day solemnly demanded reparation from
the States-General, who in their turn issued a counter order.
The Prince made skilful use of the rivalry of power between
the two assemblies to obtain for himself extraordinary powers
which were contrary to the laws of the Confederation. By the
terms of the resolution, which was passed by only four
provinces, of which two were represented by but one deputy
each, he was authorised to take all measures necessary for the
maintenance of order and peace, and particularly for the
preservation of the Union. 'The States-General consequently
commissioned him to visit the town councils of Holland,
accompanied by six members of the States-General and of the
Council of State, with all the pomp of a military escort,
including a large number of officers. He was charged to
address them with remonstrances and threats intended to
intimidate the provincial States.' This was the first act of
the coup d'état that he had prepared, and his mistake was
quickly shown him." The Prince gained nothing by his
visitation of the towns. At Amsterdam he was not permitted to
enter the place with his following, and he returned to the
Hague especially enraged against that bold and independent
city. He planned an expedition to take it by surprise; but the
citizens got timely warning and his scheme was baffled. He had
succeeded, however, in arresting and imprisoning six of the
most influential deputies of the Assembly of Holland, and his
attitude was formidable enough to extort some concessions from
the popular party, by way of compromise. A state of suspicious
quiet was restored for the time, which William improved by
renewing negotiations for a secret treaty with France.
"Arrogating to himself already the right to dispose as he
pleased of the republic, he signed a convention with Count
d'Estrades, whom he had summoned to the Hague. By this the
King of France and the Prince of Orange engaged themselves 'to
attack conjointly the Netherlands on May 1, 1651, with an army
of 20,000 foot and 10,000 horse, to break at the same time
with Cromwell, to re-establish Charles II. as King of England,
and to make no treaty with Spain excepting in concert with
each other.' The Prince of Orange guaranteed a fleet of 50
vessels besides the land contingent, and in return for his
co-operation was promised the absolute possession of the city
of Antwerp and the Duchy of Brabant or Marquisate of the Holy
Roman Empire. William thus interested France in the success of
his cause by making ready to resume the war with Spain, and
calculated, as he told his confidants, on profiting by her
assistance to disperse the cabal opposed to him. … The
internal pacification amounted then to no more than a truce,
when three months later the Prince of Orange, having
over-fatigued and heated himself in the chase, was seized with
small-pox, of which in a few days he died. He was thus carried
off at the age of 24, in the full force and flower of his age,
leaving only one son, born a week after his father's death.
… His attempt at a coup d'état was destined to press heavily
and long upon the fate of the posthumous son, who had to wait
22 years before succeeding to his ancestral functions. It
closed the succession to him for many years, by making the
stadtholdership a standing menace to the public freedom. …
The son of William II., an orphan before his birth, and named
William like his father, seemed destined to succeed to little
more than the paternal name. … Three days after the death of
William II., the former deputies, whom he had treated as state
prisoners and deprived of all their offices, were recalled to
take their seats in the Assembly. At the same time the
provincial Town Councils assumed the power of nominating their
own magistrates, which had almost always been left to the
pleasure of the Stadtholder, and thus obtained the full
enjoyment of municipal freedom. The States of Holland, on
their side, grasped the authority hitherto exercised in their
province by the Prince of Orange, and claimed successively all
the rights of sovereignty. The States of Zealand … exhibited
the same eagerness to free themselves from all subjection. …
Thus, before declaring the stadtholdership vacant, the office
was deprived of its prerogatives. To complete this
transformation of the government, the States of Holland took
the initiative in summoning to the Hague a great assembly of
the Confederation, which met at the beginning of the year
1651. … The congress was called upon to decide between two
forms of constitution. The question was whether the United
Provinces should be a republic governed by the States-General,
or whether the government should belong to the States of each
province, with only a reservation in favour of the obligations
imposed by the Act of Union. Was each province to be sovereign
in itself, or subject to the federal power?" The result was a
suspension and practical abolition of the stadtholdership.
"Freed from the counterbalancing power of the Stadtholder,
Holland to a great extent absorbed the federal power, and was
the gainer by all that that power lost. …
{2284}
The States of Holland, … destined henceforward to be the
principal instrument of government of the republic, was
composed partly of nobles and partly of deputies from the
towns. … The Grand Pensionary was the minister of the States
of Holland. He was appointed for five years, and represented
them in the States-General. … Called upon by the vacancy in
the stadtholdership to the government of the United Provinces,
without any legal power of enforcing obedience, Holland
required a statesman who could secure this political supremacy
and use it for her benefit. The nomination of John de Witt as
Grand Pensionary placed at her service one of the youngest
members of the assembly."

_A. L. Pontalis,
John de Witt,
chapters 1-2 (volume 1)._

NETHERLANDS: (Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1648.
Still held to form a part of the Empire.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1648.

NETHERLANDS: (United Provinces): A. D. 1648-1665.
Prosperity and pre-eminence of the Dutch Republic.
The causes.

"That this little patch of earth, a bog rescued from the
waters, warred on ever by man and by the elements, without
natural advantages except those of contact with the sea,
should in the middle of the seventeenth century have become
the commercial centre of Europe, is one of the phenomena of
history. But in the explanation of this phenomenon history has
one of its most instructive lessons. Philip II. said of
Holland, 'that it was the country nearest to hell.' Well might
he express such an opinion. He had buried around the walls of
its cities more than three hundred thousand Spanish soldiers,
and had spent in the attempt at its subjugation more than two
hundred million ducats. This fact alone would account for his
abhorrence, but, in addition, the republic was in its every
feature opposed to the ideal country of a bigot and a despot.
The first element which contributed to its wealth, as well as
to the vast increase of its population, was its religious
toleration. … This, of course, was as incomprehensible to a
Spanish Catholic as it was to a High-Churchman or to a
Presbyterian in England. That Lutherans, Calvinists,
Anabaptists, Jews, and Catholics should all be permitted to
live under the same government seemed to the rest of Europe
like flying in the face of Providence. Critics at this time
occasionally said that the Hollanders cared nothing for
religion; that with them theology was of less account than
commerce. To taunts like these no reply was needed by men who
could point to their record of eighty years of war. This war
had been fought for liberty of conscience, but more than all,
as the greater includes the less, for civil liberty. During
its continuance, and at every crisis, Catholics had stood side
by side with Protestants to defend their country, as they had
done in England when the Spanish Armada appeared upon her
coast. It would have been a strange reward for their fidelity
to subject them, as Elizabeth did, to a relentless
persecution, upon the pretext that they were dangerous to the
State. In addition to the toleration, there were other causes
leading to the marvellous prosperity of the republic, which
are of particular interest to Americans. In 1659, Samuel Lamb,
a prominent and far-seeing London merchant, published a
pamphlet, in the form of a letter to Cromwell, urging the
establishment of a bank in England similar to the one at
Amsterdam. In this pamphlet, which Lord Somers thought worthy
of preservation, the author gives the reasons, as they
occurred to him, which accounted for the vast superiority of
Holland over the rest of Europe as a commercial nation. … As
the foundation of a bank for England was the subject of the
letter, the author naturally lays particular stress upon that
factor, but the other causes which he enumerates as explaining
the great trade of the republic are the following: First. The
statesmen sitting at the helm in Holland are many of them
merchants, bred to trade from their youth, improved by foreign
travel, and acquainted with all the necessities of commerce.
Hence, their laws and treaties are framed with wisdom. Second.
In Holland when a merchant dies, his property is equally
divided among his children, and the business is continued and
expanded, with all its traditions and inherited experience. In
England, on the contrary, the property goes to the eldest son,
who often sets up for a country gentleman, squanders his
patrimony, and neglects the business by which his father had
become enriched. Third. The honesty of the Hollanders in their
manufacturing and commercial dealings. When goods are made up
in Holland, they sell everywhere without question, for the
purchaser knows that they are exactly as represented in
quality, weight, and measure. Not so with England's goods. Our
manufacturers are so given to fraud and adulteration as to
bring their commodities into disgrace abroad. 'And so the
Dutch have the pre-eminence in the sale of their manufactures
before us, by their true making, to their very files and
needles.' Fourth. The care and vigilance of the government in
the laying of impositions so as to encourage their own
manufactures; the skill and rapidity with which they are
changed to meet the shifting wants of trade; the encouragement
given by ample rewards from the public treasury for useful
inventions and improvements; and the promotion of men to
office for services and not for favor or sinister ends. Such
were the causes of the commercial supremacy of the Dutch as
they appeared to an English merchant of the time, and all
modern investigations support his view. … Sir Joshua
[Josiah] Child, writing a few years later ['A New Discourse of
Trade, page 2, and after—1665], gives a fuller explanation of
the great prosperity of the Netherland Republic. He evidently
had Lamb's pamphlet before him, for he enumerates all the
causes set forth by his predecessor. In addition, he gives
several others, as to some of which we shall see more
hereafter. Among these are the general education of the
people, including the women, religious toleration, care of the
poor, low custom duties and high excise, registration of
titles to real estate, low interest, the laws permitting the
assignment of debts, and the judicial system under which
controversies between merchants can be decided at one fortieth
part of the expense in England. … Probably, no body of men
governing a state were ever more enlightened and better
acquainted with the necessities of legislation than were these
burghers, merchants, and manufacturers who for two centuries
gave laws to Holland. It was largely due to the intelligence
displayed by these men that the republic, during the
continuance of its war, was enabled to support a burden of
taxation such as the world has rarely seen before or since.
{2285}
The internal taxes seem appalling. Rents were taxed
twenty-five per cent.; on all sales of real estate two and a
half per cent. were levied, and on all collateral inheritances
five per cent. On beer, wine, meat, salt, spirits, and all
articles of luxury, the tax was one hundred per cent., and on
some articles this was doubled. But this was only the internal
taxation, in the way of excise duties, which were levied on
everyone, natives and foreigners alike. In regard to foreign
commodities, which the republic needed for its support, the
system was very different. Upon them there was imposed only a
nominal duty of one per cent., while wool, the great staple
for the manufacturers, was admitted free. Here the statesmen
of the republic showed the wisdom which placed them, as
masters of political economy, at least two centuries in
advance of their contemporaries."

_D. Campbell,
The Puritan in Holland, England, and America,
volume 2, pages 324-331._

ALSO IN:
_W. T. McCullagh,
Industrial History of Free Nations,
volume 2: The Dutch, chapter 12._

NETHERLANDS: (The United Provinces): A. D. 1651-1660.
The rule of Holland, and her Grand Pensionary, John de Witt.

"The Republic had shaken off the domination of a person; it
now fell under the domination of a single province. Holland
was overwhelmingly preponderant in the federation. She
possessed the richest, most populous, and most powerful towns.
She contributed more than one-half of the whole federal
taxation. She had the right of naming the ambassadors at
Paris, Stockholm, and Vienna. The fact that the States General
met on her territory—at the Hague—necessarily gave her
additional influence and prestige. … With the Stadtholder's
power that of the States General also, as representing the
idea of centralisation, had largely disappeared. The
Provincial Estates of Holland, therefore, under the title of
'Their High Mightinesses,' became the principal power—to
such an extent, indeed, that the term 'Holland' had by the
time of the Restoration [the English Restoration, A. D. 1660]
become synonymous among foreign powers with the whole
Republic. Their chief minister was called 'The Grand
Pensionary,' and the office had been since 1653 filled by one
of the most remarkable men of the time, John de Witt. John de
Witt therefore represented, roughly speaking, the power of the
merchant aristocracy of Holland, as opposed to the claims of
the House of Orange, which were supported by the 'noblesse,'
the army, the Calvinistic clergy, and the people below the
governing class. Abroad the Orange family had the sympathy of
monarchical Governments. Louis XIV. despised the Government of
'Messieurs les Marchands,' while Charles II., at once the
uncle and the guardian of the young Prince of the house of
Orange, the future William III. of England, and mindful of
the scant courtesy which, to satisfy Cromwell, the Dutch had
shown him in exile, was ever their bitter and unscrupulous
foe. The empire of the Dutch Republic was purely commercial
and colonial, and she held in this respect the same position
relatively to the rest of Europe that England holds at the
present day."

_O. Airy,
The English Restoration and Louis XIV.,
chapter 9._

ALSO IN:
_J. Geddes,
History of the Administration of John de Witt,
volume 1._

NETHERLANDS: (Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1652.
Recovery of Dunkirk and Gravelines.
Invasion of France. See FRANCE: A. D. 1652.

NETHERLANDS: (The United Provinces): A. D. 1652.
First Settlement at the Cape of Good Hope.
See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1486-1806.

NETHERLANDS: (The United Provinces): A. D. 1652-1654.
War with the English Commonwealth.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1652-1654.

NETHERLANDS: (Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1653-1656.
Campaigns of Condé in the service of Spain against France.

See FRANCE: A. D 1653-1656.

NETHERLANDS: (Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1657-1658.
England in alliance with France in the Franco-Spanish War.
Loss of Dunkirk and Gravelines.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1655-1658.

NETHERLANDS: (Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1659.
Cessions of territory to France by the Treaty of the Pyrenees.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1664.
The seizure of New Netherland by the English.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1664.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1665-1666.
War with England renewed.

"A formal declaration of war between Holland and England took
place in March, 1665. The English nation, jealous of the
commercial prosperity of Holland, eagerly seconded the views
of the king against that country, and in regard to the war a
remarkable degree of union prevailed throughout Great Britain.
Such, however, was not the case with the Dutch, who were very
much divided in opinion, and had many reasons to be doubtful
of the support of France. One of the grand objects of Charles
II. was undoubtedly … to restore his nephew the Prince of
Orange to all the power which had been held by his ancestors
in the United Provinces. But between Holland and England there
existed, besides numerous other most fertile causes of
discord, unsettled claims, upon distant territories, rival
colonies in remote parts of the world, maritime jealousy and
constant commercial opposition. These were national motives
for hostility, and affected a large body of the Dutch people.
But, on the other hand, considerations of general interest
were set aside by the political factions which divided the
United Provinces, and which may be classed under the names of
the Republican and the Monarchical parties. The Monarchical
party was, of course, that which was attached to the interests
of the House of Orange. … In the end of 1664, 130 Dutch
merchantmen had been captured by England; acts of hostility
had occurred in Guinea, at the Cape de Verd, [in New
Netherland], and in the West Indies: but Louis [XIV. of
France] had continued to avoid taking any active part against
Great Britain, notwithstanding all the representations of De
Witt, who on this occasion saw in France the natural ally of
Holland. On the 13th of June [1665], however, a great naval
engagement took place between the Dutch fleet, commanded by
Opdam and Van Tromp, and the English fleet, commanded by the
Duke of York and Prince Rupert. Opdam was defeated and killed;
Van Tromp saved the remains of his fleet; and on the very same
day a treaty was concluded between Arlington [the English
minister] and an envoy of the Bishop of Munster, by which it
was agreed that the warlike and restless prelate should invade
the United Provinces with an army of 20,000 men, in
consideration of sums of money to be paid by England.
{2286}
This treaty at once called Louis into action, and he notified
to the Bishop of Munster that if he made any hostile movement
against the States of Holland he would find the troops of
France prepared to oppose him. This fact was announced to the
States by D'Estrades on the 22nd of July, together with the
information that the French monarch was about to send to their
assistance a body of troops by the way of Flanders. … Still,
however, Louis hung back in the execution of his purposes,
till the aspect of affairs in the beginning of 1666 forced him
to declare war against England, on the 26th of January in that
year, according to the terms of his treaty with Holland. …
The part that France took in the war was altogether
insignificant, and served but little to free the Dutch from
the danger in which they were placed. That nation itself made
vast efforts to obtain a superiority at sea; and in the
beginning of June, 1666, the Dutch fleet, commanded by De
Ruyter and Van Tromp, encountered the English fleet, under
Monk and Prince Rupert, and a battle which lasted for four
days, with scarcely any intermission, took place. It would
seem that some advantage was gained by the Dutch; but both
fleets were tremendously shattered, and retired to the ports
of their own country to refit. Shortly after, however, they
again encountered, and one of the most tremendous naval
engagements in history took place, in which the Dutch suffered
a complete defeat; 20 of their first-rate men-of-war were
captured or sunk; and three admirals, with 4,000 men, were
killed on the part of the States. The French fleet could not
come up in time to take part in the battle, and all that Louis
did was to furnish De Witt with the means of repairing the
losses of the States as rapidly as possible. The energy of the
grand pensionary himself, however, effected much more than the
slow and unwilling succour of the French king. With almost
superhuman exertion new fleets were made ready and manned,
while the grand pensionary amused the English ministers with
the prospect of a speedy peace on their own terms; and at a
moment when England was least prepared, De Ruyter and
Cornelius de Witt appeared upon the coast, sailed up the
Thames, attacked and took Sheerness, and destroyed a great
number of ships of the line. A multitude of smaller vessels
were burnt; and the consternation was so great throughout
England, that a large quantity of stores and many ships were
sunk and destroyed by order of the British authorities
themselves, while De Ruyter ravaged the whole sea-coast from
the mouth of the Thames to the Land's End. The negotiations
for peace, which had commenced at Breda, were now carried on
upon terms much more advantageous to Holland, and were
speedily concluded; England, notwithstanding the naval glory
she had gained, being fully as much tired of the war as the
States themselves. A general treaty was signed on the 25th of
July."

_G. P. R. James,
Life and Times of Louis XIV.,
volume 2, chapter 6._

"The thunder of the Dutch guns in the Medway and the Thames
woke England to a bitter sense of its degradation. The dream
of loyalty was roughly broken. 'Everybody now-a-days,' Pepys
tells us, 'reflect upon Oliver and commend him: what brave
things he did, and made all the neighbour princes fear him.'
But Oliver's successor was coolly watching this shame and
discontent of his people with the one aim of turning it to his
own advantage."

_J. R. Green,
History of the English People,
book 8, chapter 1 (volume 3)._

ALSO IN:
_C. D. Yonge,
History of the British Navy,
volume 2, chapter 5._

NETHERLANDS: (The Spanish Provinces): A. D. 1667.
The claims and conquests of Louis XIV.
The War of the Queen's Rights.

In 1660 Louis XIV., king of France, was married to the Infanta
of Spain, Maria Theresa, daughter of Philip IV., who solemnly
renounced at the time, for herself and her posterity, all
rights to the Spanish crown. The insincerity and hollowness of
the renunciation was proved terribly at a later time by the
long "war of the Spanish succession." Meantime Louis
discovered other pretended rights in his Spanish wife on which
he might found claims for the satisfaction of his territorial
greed. These rested on the fact that she was born of her
father's first marriage, and that a customary right in certain
provinces of the Spanish Netherlands gave daughters of a first
marriage priority of inheritance over sons of a second
marriage. At the same time, in the laws of Luxembourg and
Franche-Comté, which admitted all children to the partition of
an inheritance, he found pretext for claiming, on behalf of
his wife, one fourth of the former and one third of the
principality last named. Philip IV. of Spain died in
September, 1665, leaving a sickly infant son under the regency
of an incapable and priest-ruled mother, and Louis began
quickly to press his claims. Having made his preparations on a
formidable scale, he sent forth in May, 1667, to all the
courts of Europe, an elaborate "Treatise on the Rights of the
Most Christian Queen over divers States of the monarchy of
Spain," announcing at the same time his intention to make a
"journey" in the Catholic Netherlands—the intended journey
being a ruthless invasion, in fact, with 50,000 men, under the
command of the great marshal-general, Turenne. The army began
its march simultaneously with the announcement of its purpose,
crossing the frontier on the 24th of May. Town after town was
taken, some without resistance and others after a short, sharp
siege, directed by Vauban, the most famous among military
engineers. Charleroi was occupied on the 2d of June; Tournay
surrendered on the 24th; two weeks later Douai fell; Courtrai
endured only four days of siege and Oudenarde but two; Lille
was a more difficult prize and held Turenne and the king
before it for twenty days. "All Walloon Flanders had again
become French at the price of less effort and bloodshed than
it had cost, in the Middle Ages, to force one of its places.
… September 1, the whole French army was found assembled
before the walls of Ghent." But Ghent was not assailed, the
French army being greatly fatigued and much reduced by the
garrisoning of the conquered places. Louis, accordingly,
returned to Saint-Germain, and Turenne, after taking Alost,
went into winter quarters. Before the winter passed great
changes of circumstance had occurred. The Triple Alliance of
England, Holland and Sweden had been formed, Louis had made
his secret treaty at Vienna with the Emperor, for the
partitioning of the Spanish dominions, and his further
"journey" in the Netherlands was postponed.

_H. Martin,
History of France: Age of Louis XIV.
(translated by M. L. Booth),
volume 1, chapter 4._

ALSO IN:
_A. F. Pontalis,
John de Witt,
chapter 7 (volume 1)._

{2287}

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1668.
The Triple Alliance with England and Sweden
against the French king.

"The rapid conquests of the French king in Flanders during the
last summer had drawn the eyes of Europe towards the seat of
war in that country. The pope, Clement IX., through pity for
the young king of Spain, and the States, alarmed at the
approach of the French arms to their frontier, offered their
mediation. To both Louis returned the same answer, that he
sought nothing more than to vindicate the rights of his wife;
that he should be content to retain possession of the
conquests which he had already made, or to exchange them
either for Luxembourg, or Franche-comté, with the addition of
Aire, St. Omer, Donai, Cambrai, and Charleroi, to strengthen
his northern frontier. … But Spain was not sufficiently
humbled to submit to so flagrant an injustice. … If it was
the interest of England, it was still more the interest of the
States, to exclude France from the possession of Flanders.
Under this persuasion, sir William Temple, the resident at
Brussels, received instructions to proceed to the Hague and
sound the disposition of de Witt; and, on his return to
London, was despatched back again to Holland with the proposal
of a defensive alliance, the object of which should be to
compel the French monarch to make peace with Spain on the
terms which he had previously offered. … Temple acted with
promptitude and address: … he represented the danger of
delay; and, contrary to all precedent at the Hague, in the
short space of five days—had the constitutional forms been
observed it would have demanded five weeks—he negotiated
[January, 1668] three treaties which promised to put an end to
the war, or, if they failed in that point, to oppose at least
an effectual barrier to the further progress of the invader.
The first was a defensive alliance by which the two nations
bound themselves to aid each other against any aggressor with
a fleet of forty men of war, and an army of 6,400 men, or with
assistance in money in proportion to the deficiency in men; by
the second, the contracting powers agreed by every means in
their power to dispose France to conclude a peace with Spain
on the alternative already offered, to persuade Spain to
accept one part of that alternative before the end of May,
and, in case of a refusal, to compel her by war, on condition
that France should not interfere by force of arms. These
treaties were meant for the public eye: the third was secret,
and bound both England and the States, in case of the refusal
of Louis, to unite with Spain in the war, and not to lay down
their arms till the peace of the Pyrenees were confirmed. On
the same day the Swedish ambassadors gave a provisional, and
afterwards a positive assent to the league, which from that
circumstance obtained the name of the Triple Alliance. Louis
received the news of this transaction with an air of haughty
indifference. … In consequence of the infirm state of
Charles II. of Spain, he had secretly concluded with the
emperor Leopold an 'eventual' treaty of partition of the
Spanish monarchy on the expected death of that prince, and
thus had already bound himself by treaty to do the very thing
which it was the object of the allied powers to effect. …
The intervention of the emperor, in consequence of the
eventual treaty, put an end to the hesitation of the Spanish
cabinet; the ambassadors of the several powers met at
Aix-la-Chapelle [April-May, 1668]; Spain made her choice; the
conquered towns in Flanders were ceded to Louis, and peace was
re-established between the two crowns. … The States could
ill dissemble their disappointment. They never doubted that
Spain, with the choice in her hands, would preserve Flanders,
and part with Franche-comté. … The result was owing, it is
said, to the resentment of Castel-Rodrigo [the governor of the
Spanish Netherlands], who, finding that the States would not
join with England to confine France within its ancient limits,
resolved to punish them by making a cession, which brought the
French frontier to the very neighbourhood of the Dutch
territory."

_J. Lingard,
History of England,
volume 11, chapter 6._

"Dr. Lingard, who is undoubtedly a very able and well-informed
writer, but whose great fundamental rule of judging seems to
be that the popular opinion on a historical question cannot
possibly be correct, speaks very slightingly of this
celebrated treaty [of the Triple Alliance]. … But grant that
Louis was not really stopped in his progress by this famous
league; still it is certain that the world then, and long
after, believed that he was so stopped; and that this was the
prevailing impression in France as well as in other countries.
Temple, therefore, at the very least, succeeded in raising the
credit of his country, and lowering the credit of a rival
power."

_Lord Macaulay,
Sir William Temple (Essays)_.

ALSO IN:
_O. Airy,
The English Restoration and Louis XIV.,
chapter 14._

_Sir W. Temple,
Letters, January 1668
(Works, volume 1)._

_L. von Ranke,
History of England, 17th Century,
book 15, chapter 4 (volume 3)._

_A. F. Pontalis,
John de Witt,
chapter 7 (volume 1)._

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1670.
Betrayed to France by the English king.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1668-1670.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1672-1674.
The war with France and England.
Murder of the DeWitts.
Restoration of the Stadtholdership.

"The storm that had been prepared in secret for Holland began
to break in 1672. France and England had declared war at once
by land and sea, without any cause of quarrel, except that
Louis declared that the Dutch insulted him, and Charles
complained that they would not lower their flag to his, and
that they refused the Stadtholdership to his nephew, William
of Orange. Accordingly, his fleet made a piratical attack on
the Dutch ships returning from Smyrna, and Louis, with an
immense army, entered Holland. … They [the French] would
have attempted the passage of the Yssel, but the Dutch forces,
under the Prince of Orange, were on the watch, and turned
towards the Rhine, which was so low, in consequence of a
drouth, that 2,000 adventurous cavalry were able to cross,
half wading, half swimming, and gained a footing on the other
side." This "passage of the Rhine" was absurdly celebrated as
a great military exploit by the servile flatterers of the
French king. "The passage thus secured, the King crossed the
river the next day on a bridge of boats, and rapidly overran
the adjoining country, taking the lesser towns, and offering
to the Republic the most severe terms, destructive of their
independence, but securing the nominal Stadtholdership to the
Prince of Orange.
{2288}
The magistrates of Amsterdam had almost decided on carrying
the keys to Louis, and the Grand Pensionary himself was ready
to yield; but William, who preferred ruling a free people by
their own choice to being imposed on them by the conqueror,
still maintained that perseverance would save Holland, that
her dykes, when opened, would admit floods that the enemy
could not resist, and that they had only to be firm. The
spirit of the people was with him, and in Amsterdam,
Dordrecht, and the other cities, there were risings with loud
outcries of 'Orange boven,' Up with Orange, insisting that he
should be appointed Stadtholder. The magistracy confirmed the
choice, but Cornelius de Witt, too firm to yield to a popular
cry, refused to sign the appointment, and thus drew on himself
the rage of the people. He was arrested under an absurd
accusation of having bribed a man to assassinate the Prince,
and … [after torture] was sentenced to exile, whereupon his
brother [the Grand Pensionary] announced that he should
accompany him; but while he was with him in his prison at [the
Hague], the atrocious mob again arose [August 20, 1672], broke
open the doors, and, dragging out the two brothers, absolutely
tore them limb from limb."

_C. M. Yonge,
Landmarks of History,
part 3, chapter 4, part 6._