invasion, and in three months (July 18) their difficult task was accomplished.  The new Fundamental Law made no change in the autocratic powers conferred on the king.  The executive authority remained wholly in his hands.  The States-General were now to consist of two Chambers, but the First Chamber was a nominated Chamber.  It contained forty to sixty members appointed by the king for life.  The Second Chamber of 110 members, equally divided between north and south, i.e. fifty-five Dutch and fifty-five Belgian representatives, was elected under a very restricted franchise by the seventeen provinces into which the whole kingdom was divided.  The ordinary budget was voted for ten years, and it was only extraordinary expenses which had to be considered annually.  The other provisions strictly followed the principles and the liberties guaranteed in advance by the Eight Articles.

The new Fundamental Law was presented to the Dutch States-General on August 8, and was approved by a unanimous vote.  Very different was its reception in Belgium.  The king had summoned a meeting of 1603 notables to Brussels, of these 1323 were present.  The majority were hostile.  It had been strongly urged by the Belgian delegates on the Commission that the Belgic provinces, with three and a half millions of inhabitants, ought to return to the Second Chamber of the States-General a number of members proportionately greater than the Dutch provinces, which had barely two millions.  The Dutch on their part argued that their country had been an independent State for two centuries and possessed a large colonial empire, while Belgium had always been under foreign rule, and had now been added to Holland “as an increase of territory.”  It was finally arranged, however, that the representation of the northern and southern portions of the new kingdom should be equal, 55 each.  Belgian public opinion loudly protested, especially as the 55 Belgian deputies included four representatives of Luxemburg, which had been created a separate State under the personal rule of King William.  Still more bitter and determined was the opposition of the powerful clerical party to the principle of religious equality.  About 99 per cent, of the Belgian population was Catholic; and the bishops were very suspicious of what might be the effect of this principle in the hands of an autocratic Calvinist king, supported by the predominant Protestant majority in Holland.  A further grievance was that the heavy public debt incurred by Holland should be made a common burden.

Considerable pressure was brought to bear upon the notables, but without avail.  The Fundamental Law was rejected by 796 votes to 527.  Confronted with this large hostile majority, the king took upon himself to reverse the decision by an arbitrary and dishonest manipulation of the return.  He chose to assume that the 280 notables who had not voted were in favour of the Law, and added their votes to the minority.  He then declared that 126 votes had