Chapter IV: , VII (192)

In the spring of 1745, while events in the second Silesian War
were still threatening to Frederick the Great (see AUSTRIA: A.
D. 1744-1745), his allies, the French, though indifferent to
his troubles, were doing better for themselves in the
Netherlands. They had given to Marshal de Saxe, who commanded
there, an army of 76,000 excellent troops. "As to the Allies,
England had furnished her full contingent of 28,000 men, but
Holland less than half of the 50,000 she had stipulated; there
were but eight Austrian squadrons, and the whole body scarcely
exceeded 50,000 fighting men. The nominal leader was the young
Duke of Cumberland, but subject in a great measure to the
control of an Austrian veteran, Marshal Konigsegg, and obliged
to consult the Dutch commander, Prince de Waldeck. Against
these inferior numbers and divided councils the French
advanced in full confidence of victory, and, after various
movements to distract the attention of the Allies, suddenly,
on the 1st of May, invested Tournay. … To relieve this
important city, immediately became the principal object with
the Allies; and the States, usually so cautious, nay, timorous
in their suggestions, were now as eager in demanding battle.
… On the other hand, the Mareschal de Saxe made most skilful
dispositions to receive them. Leaving 15,000 infantry to cover
the blockade of Tournay, he drew up the rest of his army, a
few miles further, in an excellent position, which he
strengthened with numerous works; and his soldiers were
inspirited by the arrival of the King and Dauphin, who had
hastened from Paris to join in the expected action. The three
allied generals, on advancing against the French, found them
encamped on some gentle heights, with the village of Antoin
and the river Scheldt on their right, Fontenoy and a narrow
valley in their front, and a small wood named Barre on their
left. The passage of the Scheldt, and, if needful, a retreat,
were secured by the bridge of Calonne in the rear, by a tête
de pont, and by a reserve of the Household Troops. Abbatis
were constructed in the wood of Barre; redoubts between Antoin
and Fontenoy; and the villages themselves had been carefully
fortified and, garrisoned. The narrow space between Fontenoy
and Barre seemed sufficiently defended by cross fires, and by
the natural ruggedness of the ground: in short, as the French
officers thought, the strength of the position might bid
defiance to the boldest assailant.
{2296}
Nevertheless, the Allied chiefs, who had already resolved on a
general engagement, drove in the French piquets and outposts
on the 10th of May, New Style, and issued orders for their
intended attack at daybreak. … At six o'clock on the morning
of the 11th, the cannonade began. The Prince of Waldeck, and
his Dutch, undertook to carry Antoin and Fontenoy by assault,
while the Duke of Cumberland, at the head of the British and
Hanoverians, was to advance against the enemy's left. His
Royal Highness, at the same time with his own attack, sent
General Ingoldsby, with a division, to pierce through the wood
of Barre, and storm the redoubt beyond it." Ingoldsby's
division and the Dutch troops were both repulsed, and the
latter made no further effort. But the British and
Hanoverians, leaving their cavalry behind and dragging with
them a few field pieces, "plunged down the ravine between
Fontenoy and Barre, and marched on against a position which
the best Marshals of France had deemed impregnable, and which
the best troops of that nation defended. … Whole ranks of
the British were swept away, at once, by the murderous fire of
the batteries on their left and right. Still did their column,
diminishing in numbers not in spirit, steadily press forward,
repulse several desperate attacks of the French infantry, and
gain ground on its position. … The battle appeared to be
decided: already did Marshal Konigsegg offer his
congratulations to the Duke of Cumberland; already had
Mareschal de Saxe prepared for retreat, and, in repeated
messages, urged the King to consult his safety and withdraw,
while it was yet time, beyond the Scheldt." The continued
inactivity of the Dutch, however, enabled the French commander
to gather his last reserves at the one point of danger, while
he brought another battery to bear on the head of the
advancing British column. "The British, exhausted by their own
exertions, mowed down by the artillery in front, and assailed
by the fresh troops in flank, were overpowered. Their column
wavered—broke—fell back. … In this battle of Fontenoy (for
such is the name it has borne), the British left behind a few
pieces of artillery, but no standards, and scarce any
prisoners but the wounded. The loss in these, and in killed,
was given out as 4,041 British, 1,762 Hanoverians, and only
1,544 Dutch; while on their part the French likewise
acknowledged above 7,000." As the consequence of the battle of
Fontenoy, not only Tournay, but Ghent, likewise, was speedily
surrendered to the French. "Equal success crowned similar
attempts on Bruges, on Oudenarde, and on Dendermonde, while
the allies could only act on the defensive and cover Brussels
and Antwerp. The French next directed their arms against
Ostend, … which … yielded in fourteen days. … Meanwhile
the events in Scotland [the Jacobite rebellion—see SCOTLAND:
A. D. 1745-1746] were compelling the British government to
withdraw the greater part of their force; and it was only the
approach of winter, and the retreat of both armies into
quarters, that obtained a brief respite for the remaining
fortresses of Flanders."

_Lord Mahon (Earl Stanhope),
History of England, 1713-1783,
chapter 26 (volume 3)._

ALSO IN:
_F. P. Guizot,
Popular History of France,
chapter 52 (volume 6)._

_J. G. Wilson,
Sketches of Illustrious Soldiers: Saxe._

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1746-1747.
The War of the Austrian Succession:
French conquest of the Austrian provinces.
Humiliation of Holland.
The Stadtholdership restored.

"In the campaign in Flanders in 1746, the French followed up
the successes which they had achieved in the previous year.
Brussels, Antwerp, Mons, Charleroi, Namur, and other places
successively surrendered to Marshal Saxe and the Prince of
Conti. After the capture of Namur in September, Marshal Saxe,
reuniting all the French forces, attacked Prince Charles of
Lorraine at Raucoux [or Roucoux], between Liege and Viset, and
completely defeated him, October 11; after which both sides
went into winter quarters. All the country between the Meuse
and the sea was now in the power of France, Austria retaining
only Luxemburg and Limburg. … Ever since the year 1745 some
negociations had been going on between France and the Dutch
for the reestablishment of peace. The States-General had
proposed the assembling of a Congress to the Cabinet of
Vienna, which, however, had been rejected. In September 1746,
conferences had been opened at Breda, between France, Great
Britain, and the States-General; but as Great Britain had
gained some advantages at sea, the negociations were
protracted, and the Cabinets of London and Vienna had
endeavoured to induce the Dutch to take a more direct and
active part in the war. In this state of things the Court of
Versailles took a sudden resolution to coerce the
States-General. A manifest was published by Louis XV. April
17th 1747, filled with those pretexts which it is easy to find
on such occasions: not, indeed, exactly declaring war against
the Dutch Republic, but that he should enter her territories
'without breaking with her'; that he should hold in deposit
the places he might conquer, and restore them as soon as the
States ceased to succour his enemies. At the same time Count
Löwendahl entered Dutch Flanders by Bruges, and seized in less
than a month Sluys, Ysendick, Sas de Gand, Hulst, Axel, and
other places. Holland had now very much declined from the
position she had held a century before. There were indeed many
large capitalists in the United Provinces, whose wealth had
been amassed during the period of the Republic's commercial
prosperity, but the State as a whole was impoverished and
steeped in debt. … In … becoming the capitalists and
money-lenders of Europe, they [the Dutch] had ceased to be her
brokers and carriers. … Holland was no longer the entrepôt
of nations. The English, the Swedes, the Danes, and the
Hamburghers had appropriated the greater part of her trade.
Such was the result of the long wars in which she had been
engaged. … Her political consideration had dwindled equally
with her commerce. Instead of pretending as formerly to be the
arbiter of nations, she had become little more than the
satellite of Great Britain; a position forced upon her by fear
of France, and her anxiety to maintain her barriers against
that encroaching Power. Since the death of William III., the
republican or aristocratic party had again seized the
ascendency. William III.'s collateral heir, John William
Friso, had not been recognised as Stadtholder, and the
Republic was again governed, as in the time of De Witt, by a
Grand Pensionary and greffier. The dominant party had,
however, become highly unpopular.
{2297}
It had sacrificed the army to maintain the fleet, and the
Republic seemed to lie at the mercy of France. At the approach
of the French, consternation reigned in the provinces. The
Orange party raised its head and demanded the re-establishment
of the Stadtholdership. The town of Veere in Zealand gave the
example of insurrection, and William IV. of Nassau-Dietz, who
was already Stadtholder of Friesland, Groningen and
Gelderland, was ultimately proclaimed hereditary Stadtholder,
Captain-General and Admiral of the United Provinces. William
IV. was the son of John William Friso, and son-in-law of
George II., whose daughter, Anne, he had married. The French
threatening to attack Maestricht, the allies under the Duke of
Cumberland marched to Lawfeld in order to protect it. Here
they were attacked by Marshal Saxe, July 2nd 1747, and after a
bloody battle compelled to recross the Meuse. The Duke of
Cumberland, however, took up a position which prevented the
French from investing Maestricht. On the other hand, Löwendahl
[a Swedish general in the French service] carried
Bergen-op-Zoom by assault., July 16th." The following spring
(1748), the French succeeded in laying siege to Maestricht,
notwithstanding the presence of the allies, and it was
surrendered to them on the 7th of May. "Negociations had been
going on throughout the winter, and a Congress had been
appointed to meet at Aix-la-Chapelle, whose first conference
took place April 24th 1748." The taking of Maestricht was
intended to stimulate these negotiations for peace, and it
undoubtedly had that effect. The treaties which concluded the
war were signed the following October.

_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 6, chapter 4 (volume 3)._

ALSO IN:
_C. M. Davies,
History of Holland,
part 3, chapter 12,
part 4, chapter 1._

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1746-1787.
The restored Stadtholdership.
Forty years of peace.
War with England and trouble with Austria.
The razing of the Barriers.
Premature revolutions.

In their extremity, when the provinces of the Dutch Republic
were threatened with invasion by the French, a cry for the
House of Orange was raised once more. "The jealousies of
Provincial magistratures were overborne, and in obedience to
the voice of the people a Stadholder again arose. William of
Nassau Dietz, the heir to William III., and the successor to a
line of Stadholders who had ruled continuously in Friesland
since the days of Philip II., was summoned to power. …
William IV. had married, as William II. and William III. had
done, the daughter of a King of England. As the husband of
Anne, the child of George II., he had added to the
consideration of his House; and he was now able to secure for
his descendants the dignities to which he had himself been
elected. The States General in 1747 declared that both male
and female heirs should succeed to his honours. The
constitution was thus in a measure changed, and the
appointment of a hereditary chief magistrate appeared to many
… to be a departure from the pure ideal of a Republic. The
election of the new Stadholder brought less advantage to his
people than to his family. He could not recall the glorious
days of the great ancestors who had preceded him. Without
abilities for war himself, and jealous of those with whom he
was brought in contact, he caused disunion to arise among the
forces of the allies. … When the terms at Aix La Chapelle
restored their losses to the Dutch and confirmed the
stipulations of previous treaties in their favour, it was felt
that the Republic was indebted to the exertions of its allies,
and not to any strength or successes of its own. It was well
for the Republic that she could rest. The days of her
greatness had gone by, and the recent struggle had manifested
her decline to Europe. … The next forty years were years of
peace, … When war again arrived it was again external
circumstances [connected with the war between England and her
revolted colonies in America] that compelled the Republic to
take up arms. … She … contemplated, as it was discovered,
an alliance with the American insurgents. The exposure of her
designs drew on her a declaration of war from England, which
was followed by the temporary loss of many of her colonies
both in the East and West Indies. But in Europe the struggle
was more equally sustained. The hostile fleets engaged in 1781
off the Dogger Bank; and the Dutch sailors fought with a
success that made them claim a victory, and that at least
secured them from the consequences of a defeat. The war indeed
caused far less injury to the Republic than might have been
supposed. … When she concluded peace in 1783, the whole of
her lost colonies, with the one exception of Negapatam, were
restored to her. But the occasion of the war had been made use
of by Austria, and a blow had been meanwhile inflicted upon
the United Provinces the fatal effect of which was soon to be
apparent. The Emperor Joseph II. had long protested against
the existence of the Barrier: and he had seized upon the
opportunity to undo by an arbitrary act all that the blood and
treasure of Europe had been lavished to secure. 'The Emperor
will hear no more of Barriers,' wrote his minister; 'our
connection with France has made them needless': and the
fortresses for which William III. had schemed and Marlborough
had fought, were razed to the ground [1782]. Holland, unable
at the moment to resist, withdrew her garrisons in silence;
and Joseph, emboldened by his success, proceeded to ask for
more [1784]. The rectification of the Dutch frontiers, the
opening of the Scheldt, and the release for his subjects from
the long-enforced restrictions upon their trade did not appear
too much to him. But the spirit of the Dutch had not yet left
them. They fired at the vessels which dared to attempt to
navigate the Scheldt, and war again appeared imminent. The
support of France, however, upon which the Emperor had relied,
was now given to the Republic, and Joseph recognized that he
had gone too far. The Barrier, once destroyed, was not to be
restored; but the claims which had been put forward were
abandoned upon the payment of money compensation by the
States. The feverous age of revolution was now at hand, and
party spirit, which had ever divided the United Provinces, and
had been quickened by the intercourse and alliance with
America during the war, broke out in an insurrection against
the Stadholder [William V.], which drove him from his country,
and compelled him to appeal to Prussian troops for his
restoration. Almost at the same time, in the Austrian
provinces, a Belgic Republic was proclaimed [1787], the result
in a great degree of imprudent changes which Joseph II. had
enforced. The Dutch returned to their obedience under
Prussian threats [and invasion of Holland by an army of 30,000
men—September, 1787], and Belgium under the concessions of
Leopold III. But these were the clouds foreshadowing the
coming storm, beneath whose fury all Europe was to tremble."

_C. F. Johnstone,
Historical Abstracts,
chapter 2._

ALSO IN:
_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 6, chapter 8 (volume 3)._

_F. C. Schlosser,
History of the 18th Century, period 4,
chapter 1, section 2,
and chapter 2, section 2 (volume 5)._

{2298}

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1748.
Termination and results of the War of the Austrian Succession.
French conquests restored to Austria and to Holland.

See AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, THE CONGRESS.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1782.
Recognition of the United States of America.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1782 (APRIL).

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1792-1793.
The Austrian provinces occupied
by the French revolutionary army.
Determination to annex them to the French Republic.
Preparations to attack Holland.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1702 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER);
and 1702-1703 (DECEMBER-FEBRUARY).

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1793 (February-April).
French invasion of Holland.
Defeat at Neerwinden and retreat.
Recovery of Belgian provinces by the Austrians.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (FEBRUARY-APRIL).

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1793 (March-September).
The Coalition against Revolutionary France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (MARCH-SEPTEMBER).

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1794.
French conquest of the Austrian Provinces.
Holland open to invasion.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1794-1795.
Subjugation and occupation by the French.
Overthrow of the Stadtholdership.
Establishment of the Batavian Republic, in alliance with France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794-1795 (OCTOBER-MAY).

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1797.
Naval defeat by the English in the Battle of Camperdown.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1797.

NETHERLANDS: (Austrian Provinces): A. D. 1797.
Ceded to France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1797 (MAY-OCTOBER).

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1799.
English and Russian invasion.
Capture of the Dutch fleet.
Ignominious ending of the expedition.
Capitulation of the Duke of York.
Dissolution of the Dutch East India Company.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1790 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER),
and (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1801.
Revolution instigated and enforced by Bonaparte.
A new Constitution.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1803.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1802.
The Peace of Amiens.
Recovery of the Cape of Good Hope and Dutch Guiana.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1806.
Final seizure of Cape Colony by the English.

See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1486-1806.

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1806-1810.
Commercial blockade by the English Orders in Council and
Napoleon's Decrees.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1806-1810.

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1806-1810.
The Batavian Republic transformed into the Kingdom of Holland.
Louis Bonaparte made King.
His fidelity to the country offensive to Napoleon.
His abdication.
Annexation of Holland to the French empire.

"While Bonaparte was the chief of the French republic, he had
no objection to the existence of a Batavian republic in the
north of France, and he equally tolerated the Cisalpine
republic in the south. But after the coronation all the
republics, which were grouped like satellites round the grand
republic, were converted into kingdoms, subject to the empire,
if not avowedly, at least in fact. In this respect there was
no difference between the Batavian and Cisalpine republic. The
latter having been metamorphosed into the kingdom of Italy, it
was necessary to find some pretext for transforming the former
into the kingdom of Holland. … The Emperor kept up such an
extensive agency in Holland that he easily got up a
deputation, soliciting him to choose a king for the Batavian
republic. This submissive deputation came to Paris in 1806, to
solicit the Emperor, as a favour, to place Prince Louis
[Napoleon's brother] on the throne of Holland. … Louis
became King of Holland much against his inclination, for he
opposed the proposition as much as he dared, alleging as an
objection the state of his health, to which certainly the
climate of Holland was not favourable; but Bonaparte sternly
replied to his remonstrance—'It is better to die a king than
live a prince.' He was then obliged to accept the crown. He
went to Holland accompanied by Hortense, who, however, did not
stay long there. The new king wanted to make himself beloved
by his subjects, and as they were an entirely commercial
people, the best way to win their affections was … not to
adopt Napoleon's rigid laws against commercial intercourse
with England. Hence the first coolness between the two
brothers, which ended in the abdication of Louis. I know not
whether Napoleon recollected the motive assigned by Louis for
at first refusing the crown of Holland, namely, the climate of
the country, or whether he calculated upon greater submission
in another of his brothers; but this is certain, that Joseph
was not called from the throne of Naples to the throne of
Spain, until after the refusal of Louis. … Before finally
seizing Holland, Napoleon formed the project of separating
from it Brabant and Zealand, in exchange for other provinces,
the possession of which was doubtful: but Louis successfully
resisted this first act of usurpation. Bonaparte was too
intent on the great business in Spain, to risk any commotion
in the north, where the declaration of Russia against Sweden
already sufficiently occupied him. He therefore did not insist
upon, and even affected indifference to the proposed
augmentation of the territory of the empire. … But when he
got his brother Joseph recognized, and when he had himself
struck an important blow in the Peninsula, he began to change
his tone to Louis. On the 20th of December [1808] he wrote to
him a very remarkable letter, which exhibits the unreserved
expression of that tyranny which he wished to exercise over
all his family in order to make them the instruments of his
despotism. He reproached Louis for not following his system of
policy, telling him that he had forgotten he was a Frenchman,
and that he wished to become a Dutchman. Among other things he
said: … 'I have been obliged a second time to prohibit trade
with Holland. In this state of things we may consider
ourselves really at war. In my speech to the legislative body
I manifested my displeasure; for I will not conceal from you,
that my intention is to unite Holland with France.
{2299}
This will be the most severe blow I can aim against England,
and will deliver me from the perpetual insults which the
plotters of your cabinet are constantly directing against me.
The mouths of the Rhine, and of the Meuse, ought, indeed, to
belong to me. … The following are my conditions:—First, the
interdiction of all trade and communication with England.
Second. The supply of a fleet of fourteen sail of the line,
seven frigates and seven brigs or corvettes, armed and manned.
Third, an army of 25,000 men. Fourth. The suppression of the
rank of Marshals. Fifth. The abolition of all the privileges
of nobility, which is contrary to the constitution. Your
Majesty may negotiate on these bases with the Duke de Cadore,
through the medium of your minister; but be assured, that on
the entrance of the first packet-boat into Holland, I will
restore my prohibitions, and that the first Dutch officer who
may presume to insult my flag, shall be seized and hanged at
the main-yard. Your Majesty will find in me a brother if you
prove yourself a Frenchman; but if you forget the sentiments
which attach you to our common country, you cannot think it
extraordinary that I should lose sight of those which nature
has raised between us. In short, the union of Holland and
France will be, of all things, most useful to France, Holland
and the Continent, because it will be most injurious to
England. This union must be effected willingly, or by force.'
… Here the correspondence between the two brothers was
suspended for a time; but Louis still continued exposed to new
vexations on the part of Napoleon. About the end of 1809, the
Emperor summoned to Paris the sovereigns who might be called
his vassals. Among the number was Louis, who, however, did not
shew himself very willing to quit his states. He called a
council of his ministers, who were of opinion that for the
interest of Holland he ought to make this new sacrifice. He
did so with resignation. Indeed, every day passed on the
throne was a sacrifice to Louis. … Amidst the general
silence of the servants of the empire, and even of the kings
and princes assembled in the capital, he ventured to say:—'I
have been deceived by promises which were never intended to be
kept. Holland is tired of being the sport of France.' The
Emperor, who was unused to such language as this, was highly
incensed at it. Louis had now no alternative, but to yield to
the incessant exactions of Napoleon, or to see Holland united
to France. He chose the latter, though not before he had
exerted all his feeble power in behalf of the subjects whom
Napoleon had consigned to him; but he would not be the
accomplice of him who had resolved to make those subjects the
victims of his hatred against England. … Louis was, however,
permitted to return to his states, to contemplate the
stagnating effect of the continental blockade on every branch
of trade and industry, formerly so active in Holland.
Distressed at witnessing evils to which he could apply no
remedy, he endeavoured by some prudent remonstrances to avert
the utter ruin with which Holland was threatened. On the 23rd
of March, 1810, he wrote … [a] letter to Napoleon. …
Written remonstrances were not more to Napoleon's taste than
verbal ones at a time when, as I was informed by my friends,
whom fortune chained to his destiny, no one presumed to
address a word to him, except to answer his questions. … His
brother's letter highly roused his displeasure. Two months
after he received it, being on a journey in the north, he
addressed to Louis from Ostend a letter," followed in a few
days by another in which latter he said: "'I want no more
phrases and protestations. It is time I should know whether
you intend, by your follies, to ruin Holland. I do not choose
that you should again send a Minister to Austria, or that you
should dismiss the French who are in your service. I have
recalled my Ambassador, as I intend only to have a
Chargé-d'affaires in Holland. The Sieur Serrurier, who remains
there in that capacity, will communicate to you my intentions.
My Ambassador shall no longer be exposed to your insults.
Write to me no more those set phrases which you have been
repeating for the last three years, and the falsehood of which
is proved every day. This is the last letter I will ever write
to you as long as I live.' … Thus reduced to the cruel
alternative of crushing Holland with his own hands, or leaving
that task to the Emperor, Louis did not hesitate to lay down
his sceptre. Having formed this resolution, he addressed a
message to the legislative body of the kingdom of Holland,
explaining the motives of his abdication. … The French
troops entered Holland under the command of the Duke de
Reggio; and that Marshal, who was more King than the King
himself, threatened to occupy Amsterdam. Louis then descended
from his throne [July 1, 1810]. … Louis bade farewell to the
people of Holland in a proclamation, after the publication of
which he repaired to the waters of Toeplitz. There he was
living in tranquil retirement, when he learnt that his brother
had united Holland to the Empire [December 10, 1810]. He then
published a protest. … Thus there seemed to be an end of all
intercourse between these two brothers, who were so opposite
in character and disposition. But Napoleon, who was enraged
that Louis should have presumed to protest, and that in
energetic terms, against the union of his kingdom with the
empire, ordered him to return to France, whither he was
summoned in his character of Constable and French Prince.
Louis, however, did not think proper to obey this summons, and
Napoleon, faithful to his promise of never writing to him
again, ordered … [a] letter to be addressed to him by M.
Otto, … Ambassador from France to Vienna," saying: "'The
Emperor requires that Prince Louis shall return, at the
latest, by the 1st of December next, under pain of being
considered as disobeying the constitution of the empire and
the head of his family, and being treated accordingly.'"

_M. de Bourrienne,
Private Memoirs of Napoleon,
volume 4, chapter 2._

ALSO IN:
_D. A. Bingham,
Marriages of the Bonapartes,
chapter 11 (volume 2)._

_T. C. Grattan,
History of the Netherlands,
chapter 22._

See, also,
FRANCE: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-OCTOBER).

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1809.
The English Walcheren expedition against Antwerp.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (JULY-DECEMBER).

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1811.
Java taken by the English.

See INDIA: A. D. 1805-1816.

{2300}

NETHERLANDS: (Holland): A. D. 1813.
Expulsion of the French.
Independence regained.
Restoration of the Prince of Orange.

"The universal fermentation produced in Europe by the
deliverance of Germany was not long of spreading to the Dutch
Provinces.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1812-1813, to 1813 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

The yoke of Napoleon, universally grievous from the enormous
pecuniary exactions with which it was attended, and the
wasting military conscriptions to which it immediately led,
had been in a peculiar manner felt as oppressive in Holland,
from the maritime and commercial habits of the people, and the
total stoppage of all their sources of industry, which the
naval war and long-continued blockade of their coasts had
occasioned. They had tasted for nearly twenty years of the
last drop of humiliation in the cup of the vanquished—that of
being compelled themselves to aid in upholding the system
which was exterminating their resources, and to purchase with
the blood of their children the ruin of their country. These
feelings, which had for years existed in such intensity, as to
have rendered revolt inevitable but for the evident
hopelessness at all former times of the attempt, could no
longer be restrained after the battle of Leipsic had thrown
down the colossus of French external power, and the approach
of the Allied standards to their frontiers had opened to the
people the means of salvation.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER) and (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

From the Hansa Towns the flame of independence spread to the
nearest cities of the old United Provinces; and the small
number of French troops in the country at once encouraged
revolt and paved the way for external aid. At this period, the
whole troops which Napoleon had in Holland did not exceed
6,000 French, and two regiments of Germans, upon whose
fidelity to their colours little reliance could be placed.
Upon the approach of the Allied troops under Bulow, who
advanced by the road of Munster, and Winzingerode, who soon
followed from the same quarter, the douaniers all withdrew
from the coast, the garrison of Amsterdam retired, and the
whole disposable force of the country was concentrated at
Utrecht, to form a corps of observation, and act according to
circumstances. This was the signal for a general revolt. At
Amsterdam [November 15], the troops were no sooner gone than
the inhabitants rose in insurrection, deposed the Imperial
authorities, hoisted the orange flag, and established a
provisional government with a view to the restoration of the
ancient order of things; yet not violently or with cruelty,
but with the calmness and composure which attest the exercise
of social rights by a people long habituated to their
enjoyment. The same change took place, at the same time and in
the same orderly manner, at Rotterdam, Dordrecht, Delft,
Leyden, Haarlem, and the other chief towns; the people,
everywhere, amidst cries of 'Orange Boven' and universal
rapture, mounted the orange cockade, and reinstated the
ancient authorities. … Military and political consequences
of the highest importance immediately followed this
uncontrollable outbreak of public enthusiasm. A deputation
from Holland waited on the Prince Regent of England and the
Prince of Orange, in London: the latter shortly after embarked
on board an English line-of-battle ship, the Warrior, and on
the 27th landed at Scheveling, from whence he proceeded to the
Hague. Meantime the French troops and coast-guards, who had
concentrated at Utrecht, seeing that the general effervescence
was not as yet supported by any solid military force, and that
the people, though they had all hoisted the orange flag, were
not aided by any corps of the Allies, recovered from their
consternation, and made it general forward movement against
Amsterdam. Before they got there, however, a body of 300
Cossacks had reached that capital, where they were received
with enthusiastic joy: and this advanced guard was soon after
followed by General Benkendorf's brigade, which, after
travelling by post from Zwoll to Harderwyk, embarked at the
latter plage, and, by the aid of a favourable wind, reached
Amsterdam on the 1st December. The Russian general immediately
advanced against the forts of Mayder and Halfweg, of which he
made himself master, taking twenty pieces of cannon and 600
prisoners; while on the eastern frontier, General Oppen, with
Bulow's advanced guards, carried Dornbourg by assault on the
23d, and, advancing against Arnheim, threw the garrison, 3,000
strong, which strove to prevent the place being invested, with
great loss back into the town. Next day, Bulow himself came up
with the main strength of his corps, and, as the ditches were
still dry, hazarded an escalade, which proved entirely
successful; the greater part of the garrison retiring to
Nimeguen, by the bridge of the Rhine. The French troops,
finding themselves thus threatened on all sides, withdrew
altogether from Holland: the fleet at the Texel hoisted the
orange flag, with the exception of Admiral Verhuel, who, with
a body of marines that still proved faithful to Napoleon,
threw himself with honourable fidelity into the fort of the
Texel. Amsterdam, amidst transports of enthusiasm, received
the beloved representative of the House of Orange. Before the
close of the year, the tricolour flag floated only on
Bergen-op-zoom and a few of the southern frontier fortresses;
and Europe beheld the prodigy of the seat of war having been
transferred in a single year from the banks of the Niemen to
those of the Scheldt."

_Sir A. Alison,
History of Europe, 1789-1815,
chapter 82 (volume 17)._

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1814 (May-June).
Belgium, or the former Austrian provinces and Liege, annexed
to Holland, and the kingdom of the Netherlands created.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (APRIL-JUNE);
and VIENNA, THE CONGRESS OF.

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1815.
The Waterloo campaign.
Defeat and overthrow of Napoleon.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1815 (JUNE).

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1816.
Accession to the Holy Alliance.

See HOLY ALLIANCE.

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1830-1832.
Belgian revolt and acquisition of independence.
Dissolution of the kingdom of the Netherlands.
Creation of the kingdom of Belgium.
Siege of Antwerp citadel.

"In one sense the union" of Belgium with Holland, in the
kingdom of the Netherlands created by the Congress of Vienna,
"was defensible. Holland enjoyed more real freedom than any
other Continental monarchy; and the Belgians had a voice in
the government of the united territory. But, in another sense,
the union was singularly unhappy. The phlegmatic Dutch
Protestant was as indisposed to unite with the light-hearted
Roman Catholic Belgian as the languid waters of the Saone with
the impetuous torrent of the Rhone. Different as were the
rivers, they met at last; and diplomatists probably hoped that
Dutch and Belgians would similarly combine.
{2301}
These hopes were disappointed, and the two people, incapable
of union, endeavoured to find independent courses for
themselves in separate channels. The grounds of Belgian
dislike to the union were intelligible. Belgium had a
population of 3,400,000 souls; Holland of only 2,000,000
persons. Yet both countries had an equal representation in the
States-General. Belgium was taxed more heavily than Holland,
and the produce of taxation went almost entirely into Dutch
pockets. The Court, which was Dutch, resided in Holland. The
public offices were in Holland. Four persons out of every five
in the public service at home were Dutchmen. The army was
almost exclusively commanded by Dutchmen. Dutch professors
were appointed to educate the Belgian youths in Belgian
schools, and a Dutch director was placed over the Bank of
Brussels. The Court even endeavoured to change the language of
the Belgian race, and to substitute Dutch for French in all
judicial proceedings. The Belgians were naturally irritated.
… On the 2nd of June, the States-General were dissolved; the
elections were peacefully concluded; and the closest observers
failed to detect any symptoms of the coming storm on the
political horizon. The storm which was to overwhelm the union
was, in fact, gathering in another country. The events of July
[at Paris] were to shake Europe to the centre. 'On all sides
crowns were falling into the gutter,' and the shock of
revolution in Paris was felt perceptibly in Brussels. Nine
years before the States-General had imposed a mouture, or tax
upon flour. The tax had been carried by a very small majority;
and the majority had been almost entirely composed of Dutch
members. On the 25th of August, 1830, the lower orders in
Brussels engaged in a serious riot, ostensibly directed
against this tax. The offices of a newspaper, conducted in the
interests of the Dutch, were attacked; the house of the
Minister of Justice was set on fire; the wine and spirit shops
were forced open; and the mob, maddened by liquor, proceeded
to other acts of pillage. On the morning of the 26th of August
the troops were called out and instructed to restore order.
Various conflicts took place between the soldiers and the
people; but the former gained no advantage over the rioters,
and were withdrawn into the Place Royale, the central square
of the town. Relieved from the interference of the military,
the mob continued the work of destruction. Respectable
citizens, dreading the destruction of their property,
organised a guard for the preservation of order. Order was
preserved; but the task of preserving it had converted
Brussels into an armed camp. It had placed the entire control
of the town in the hands of the inhabitants. Men who had
unexpectedly obtained a mastery over the situation could
hardly be expected to resign the power which events had given
to them. They had taken up their arms to repress a mob;
victors over the populace, they turned their arms against the
Government, and boldly despatched a deputation to the king
urging the concession of reforms and the immediate convocation
of the States-General. The king had received the news of the
events at Brussels with considerable alarm. Troops had been at
once ordered to march on the city; and, on the 28th of August,
an army of 6,000 men had encamped under its walls. The
citizens, however, represented that the entrance of the troops
would be a signal for the renewal of the disturbances; and the
officer in command in consequence agreed to remain passively
outside the walls. The king sent the Prince of Orange to make
terms with his insurgent subjects. The citizens declined to
admit the prince into the city unless he came without his
soldiers. The prince, unable to obtain any modification of
this stipulation, was obliged to trust himself to the people
alone. It was already evident that the chief town of Belgium
had shaken off the control of the Dutch Government. The king,
compelled to submit to the demands of the deputation, summoned
the States-General for the 13th of September. But this
concession only induced the Belgians to raise their demands.
They had hitherto only asked for reforms: they now demanded
independence, the dissolution of the union, and the
independent administration of Belgium. The revolution had
originally been confined to Brussels: it soon extended to
other towns. Civic guards were organised in Liege, Tournay,
Mons, Verviers, Bruges, and other places. Imitating the
example of Brussels, they demanded the dissolution of the
union between Holland and Belgium. The troops, consisting of a
mixed force of Dutch and Belgians, could not be depended on;
and the restoration of the royal authority was obviously
impossible. On the 13th of September the States-General met.
The question of separation was referred to them by the king;
and the Deputies leisurely applied themselves to its
consideration, in conformity with the tedious rules by which
their proceedings were regulated. Long before they had
completed the preliminary discussions which they thought
necessary the march of events had taken the question out of
their hands. On the 19th of September fresh disturbances broke
out in Brussels. The civic guard, attempting to quell the
riot, was overpowered; and the rioters, elated with their
success, announced their intention of attacking the troops,
who were encamped outside the city walls. Prince Frederick of
Orange, concluding that action was inevitable, at last made up
his mind to attack the town. Dividing the forces under his
command into six columns, he directed them, on the 23rd of
September, against the six gates of the city. … Three of the
columns succeeded, after a serious struggle, in obtaining
possession of the higher parts of the city; but they were
unable to accomplish any decisive victory. For four days the
contest was renewed. On the 27th of September, the troops,
unable to advance, were withdrawn from the positions which
they had won. On the following day the Lower Chamber of the
States-General decided in favour of a dissolution of the
union. The crown of Belgium was evidently dropping into the
gutter; but the king decided on making one more effort to
preserve it in his family. On the 4th of October he sent the
Prince of Orange to Antwerp, authorising him to form a
separate Administration for the southern provinces of the
kingdom, and to place himself at the head of it. …
Arrangements of this character had, however, already become
impossible. On the very day on which the prince reached
Antwerp the Provisional Government at Brussels issued an
ordonnance declaring the independence of Belgium and the
immediate convocation of a National Congress. …
{2302}
On the 10th of October, the Provisional Government, following
up its former ordonnance, issued a second decree, regulating
the composition of the National Congress and the
qualifications of the electors. On the 12th the elections were
fixed for the 27th of October. On the 10th of November the
Congress was formally opened; and on the 18th the independence
of the Belgian people was formally proclaimed by its
authority. … On the 4th of November the Ministers of the
five great Continental powers, assembled in London at the
invitation of the King of Holland, declared that an armistice
should immediately be concluded, and that the Dutch troops
should be withdrawn from Belgium. The signature of this
protocol, on the eve of the meeting of the National Congress,
virtually led to the independence of the Belgian people, which
the Congress immediately proclaimed."

_S. Walpole,
History of England from 1815,
chapter 11 (volume 2)._

It still remained for the Powers to provide a king for
Belgium, and to gain the consent of the Dutch and Belgian
Governments to the territorial arrangements drawn up for them.
The first difficulty was overcome in June, 1831, by the choice
of Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg to be king of Belgium. The
second problem was complicated by strong claims on both sides
to the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg. The Conference solved it by
dividing the disputed territory between Belgium and Holland.
The Belgians accepted the arrangement; the King of Holland
rejected it, and was coerced by France and England, who
expelled his forces from Antwerp, which he still held. A
French army laid siege to the citadel, while an English fleet
blockaded the river Scheldt. After a bombardment of 24 days,
December, 1832, the citadel surrendered; but it was not until
April, 1839, the final Treaty of Peace between Belgium and
Holland was signed.

_C. A. Fyffe,
History of Modern Europe,
volume 2, chapter 5._

ALSO IN:
_Sir A. Alison,
History of Europe, 1815-1852,
chapters 24-25 and 29._

NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1830-1884.
Peaceful years of the kingdoms of Belgium and Holland.
Constitutional and material progress.
The contest of Catholics and Liberals in Belgium.

"After winning its independence (1830) Belgium has also been
free to work out its own career of prosperous development.
King Leopold I. during his long reign showed himself the model
of a constitutional sovereign in furthering its progress. The
first railway on the continent was opened in 1835 between
Brussels and Malines, and its railway system is now most
complete. Its population between 1830 and 1880 increased by
more than one-third, and now is the densest in all Europe,
numbering 5,900,000 on an area only twice as large as
Yorkshire. … When Napoleon III. seized on power in France
all Belgians feared that he would imitate his uncle by seizing
Belgium and all land up to the Rhine; but the close connection
of King Leopold [brother of Prince Albert, the Prince Consort]
with the English royal house and his skilful diplomacy averted
the danger from Belgium. The chief internal trouble has been
the strife between the liberal and clerical parties. In 1850
there were over 400 monasteries, with some 12,000 monks and
nuns, in the land, and the Liberals made strenuous efforts for
many years to abolish these and control education; but neither
party could command a firm and lasting majority. In the midst
of these eager disputes King Leopold I. died (1865), after
seeing his kingdom firmly established in spite of ministerial
crises every few months. His son Leopold II. has also been a
constitutional sovereign. In 1867 the Luxemburg question
seemed to threaten the Belgian territory, for Napoleon III.
had secretly proposed to Bismarck that France should take
Belgium and Luxemburg, as well as all land up to the Rhine, as
the price of his friendship to the new German Confederation.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1866-1870.

… Again in 1870 the Franco-German war threw a severe strain
on Belgium to guard its neutrality, but after Sedan this
danger vanished. The strife between the liberal and clerical
parties went on as fiercely in Belgium as in France itself,
and after the rise and fall of many ministries the Liberals
succeeded in closing the convents and gaining control over
State education. The constitution is that of a limited
monarchy with responsible ministers, Senate, and Chamber of
Deputies. The electorate up to 1884 was limited to citizens
paying 42 francs a year in direct taxes, but in 1884 it was
extended by the clerical party acting for once in connection
with the radicals." (On the revised constitution of 1893 see
below: 1892-1893.) In the kingdom of the Netherlands
(Holland), King William, after he had been forced to recognize
Belgian independence, "abdicated [1840] in favour of his son.
The latter soon restored a good understanding with Belgium,
and improved the finances of his kingdom; so the upheavals of
1848 caused no revolution in Holland, and only led to a
thorough reform of its constitution. The Upper House of the
States-General consists of members chosen for nine years by
the estates or councils of the provinces, those of the lower
house by electors having a property qualification. The king's
ministers are now responsible to the Parliament. Liberty of
the press and of public worship is recognised. The chief
questions in Holland have been the reduction of its heavy
debt, the increase of its army and navy, the improvement of
agriculture and commerce, and the management of large and
difficult colonial possessions." Holland "has to manage
28,000,000 subjects over the seas, mostly in Malaysia. She
there holds all Java, parts of Borneo, Sumatra, Timor, the
Moluccas, Celebes, and the western half of New Guinea; in
South America, Dutch Guiana and, the Isle of Curaçoa. It was
not till 1862 that the Dutch at a great cost freed the slaves
in their West Indian possessions [viz., the islands of
Curaçoa, Aruba, St. Martin, Bonaire, St. Eustache, and Saba];
but their rule in Malaysia is still conducted with the main
purpose of securing revenue by means of an oppressive labour
system. The Dutch claims in Sumatra are contested by the
people of Acheen in the northern part of that great island."

_J. H. Rose,
A Century of Continental History,
chapter 43._