king with watchful and hostile suspicion.  Nor were the Belgian liberal party more friendly.  They did not indeed support the clerical claim to practical predominance in the State, but they were patriotic Belgians who had no love for Holland and resented the thought that they were being treated as a dependency of their northern neighbours.  They were at one with the clericals in claiming that the Belgian representation in the Second Chamber of the States-General should be proportional to their population.  But this grievance might have been tolerated had the king shown any inclination to treat his Belgian subjects on a footing of equality with the Dutch.  He was, as will be seen, keenly interested in the welfare and progress of the south, but in spirit and in his conduct of affairs he proved himself to be an out-and-out Hollander.  The provision of the Fundamental Law that the seat of government and the meetings of the States-General should be alternately from year to year at the Hague and at Brussels was never carried out.  All the ministries were permanently located at the Hague; and of the seven ministers who held office in 1816 only one, the Duke d’Ursel, was a Belgian, and he held the post of Minister of Public Works and Waterways.  Fourteen years later (at the time of the revolt) six out of seven were still northerners.  The military establishments were all in Holland, and nearly all the diplomatic and civil posts were given to Dutchmen.  Nor was this merely due to the fact that, when the union took place, Holland already possessed an organised government and a supply of experienced officials, while Belgium lacked both.  On the contrary, the policy of the king remained fixed and unwavering.  In 1830 out of 39 diplomatists 30 were Dutch.  All the chief military posts were filled by Dutchmen.  Nor was it different in the civil service.  In the home department there were 117 Dutch, 11 Belgians; in the war department 102 Dutch, 3 Belgians; in finance 59 Dutch, 5 Belgians.  Such a state of things was bound to cause resentment.  Parties in the Belgic provinces were in the early days of the Union divided very much as they have been in recent years.  The Catholic or Clerical party had its stronghold in the two Flanders and Antwerp, i.e. in the Flemish-speaking districts.  In Walloon Belgium the Liberals had a considerable majority.  The opposition to the Fundamental Law came overwhelmingly from Flemish Belgium; the support from Liege, Namur, Luxemburg and other Walloon districts.  But the sense of injustice brought both parties together, so that in the representative Chamber the Belgian members were soon found voting solidly together, as a permanent opposition, while the Dutch voted en bloc for the government.  As the representation of north and south was equal, 55 members each, the result would have been a deadlock, but there were always two or three Belgians who held government offices; and these were compelled, on pain of instant dismissal, to vote for a government measure