Such, then, being the spirit which prompted the provinces upon this great occasion, it may be asked who were the men who signed a document of such importance?  In whose-name and by what authority did they act against the sovereign?  The signers of the declaration of independence acted in the name and by the authority of the Netherlands people.  The estates were the constitutional representatives of that people.  The statesmen of that day discovering, upon cold analysis of facts, that Philip’s sovereignty was, legally forfeited; formally proclaimed that forfeiture.  Then inquiring what had become of the sovereignty, they found it not in the mass of the people, but in the representative body, which actually personated the people.  The estates of the different provinces—­consisting of the knights, nobles, and burgesses of each—­sent, accordingly, their deputies to the general assembly at the Hague; and by this congress the decree of abjuration was issued.  It did, not occur to any one to summon the people in their primary assemblies, nor would the people of that day, have comprehended the objects of such a summons.  They were accustomed to the action of the estates, and those bodies represented as large a number of political capacities as could be expected of assemblies chosen then upon general principles.  The hour had not arrived for more profound analysis of the social compact.  Philip was accordingly deposed justly, legally formally justly, because it had become necessary to abjur a monarch who was determined not only to oppress; but to exterminate his people; legally, because he had habitually violated the constitutions which he had sworn to support; formally, because the act was done in the name of the people, by the body historically representing the people.

What, then, was the condition of the nation, after this great step had been taken?  It stood, as it were, with its sovereignty in its hand, dividing it into two portions, and offering it, thus separated, to two distinct individuals.  The sovereignty of Holland and Zealand had been reluctantly accepted by Orange.  The sovereignty of the united provinces had been offered to Anjou, but the terms of agreement with that Duke had not yet been ratified.  The movement was therefore triple, consisting of an abjuration and of two separate elections of hereditary chiefs; these two elections being accomplished in the same manner, by the representative bodies respectively of the united provinces, and of Holland and Zealand.  Neither the abjuration nor the elections were acted upon beforehand by the communities, the train-bands, or the guilds of the cities—­all represented, in fact, by the magistrates and councils of each; nor by the peasantry of the open country—­all supposed to be represented by the knights and nobles.  All classes of individuals, however; arranged in various political or military combinations, gave their acquiescence afterwards, together with their oaths of allegiance.  The people approved the important steps taken by their representatives.