§ 5. Question of the free na Hanover acceded, together with a number of other German states, for the guarantee of the constitution of the empire. This league might have worked a complete revolution in the internal affairs of Germany, had it not been cast into the shade by the mightier events of the French revolution.i The Emperor Joseph II, defeated in his designs on the vigation of the Bavarian succession, turned his restless activity in another Scheldt, 1781. direction. The treaty of Westphalia, 1648, by which the independence of the United Provinces was acknowledged by Spain, contained a stipulation, according to which the mouth of the river Scheldt, the great outlet for the commerce of the Catholic provinces still remaining under the Spanish dominion, was to continue forever shut on the side of the United Provinces proprietors of both banks towards the sea. It was also stipulated by the same treaty that the Spaniards should continue to enjoy their navigation to the Indian seas in its existing state, without the faculty of extending it, and that the inhabitants of the United Provinces should abstain from frequenting the places occupied by Spain in the East Indies. When the Catholic provinces of the Netherlands were transferred to the German branch of the house of Austria, by the treaty of Utrecht, 1713, they were at the same time subjected to a military servi tude intended for the protection of the United Provinces from the danger of invasion on the side of France. the final Barrier treaty signed at Antwerp on the 15th November, 1715, between Austria, Great Britain, and Holland, it was stipulated that Namur, Tournay, Menin, Furnes, Ypres, and certain other towns of the barrier should be fortified and garrisoned by the Dutch. By Joseph II declared, in 1781, that the barrier was no longer necessary for the security of Holland since the alliance between Austria and France, and in order to get rid i Schoell, Histoire abrégée des Traités de Paix, ch. 19, §§ 1, 2. of the commercial servitudes thus imposed upon Belgium in favour of Holland, in respect to the East India trade and the navigation of the Scheldt, which were almost fatal to the prosperity of the Austrian provinces, he brought forward in 1784, several antiquated claims against the republic. These claims being repelled by the States General, the Emperor declared that he would relinquish them all, if they would consent to open the navigation of the Scheldt to his subjects, and permit them to carry on the direct trade between the East Indies and the port of Ostend. The Dutch applied for the interference of Great Britain and France. The British government declined its mediation, but that of France was offered, and accepted by the Emperor. In the declaration drawn up by the Count de Vergennes on this occasion, it was stated, that the Dutch, in resisting the Emperor's demand for opening the Scheldt, did but maintain a right, which they had enjoyed without interruption for a century and a half, which was secured to them by a solemn treaty, and which they considered as the foundation of their prosperity, and even essential to their very existence. A compromise was at last effected by the treaty of Fontainbleau, November 8th, 1785, under the mediation and guarantee of France, by which the stipulations of the treaty of Westphalia, 1648, were confirmed; the barrier treaties annulled; and it was agreed that the river Scheldt, from Saftingen to the sea, (of which the exclusive sovereignty should continue to belong to the States General,) should continue to be shut on their side, as well as the canals of Sas, of Swin, and the other mouths of the sea there terminating, conformably to the treaty of Munster. In return for these concessions, the Dutch accorded several of the Emperor's demands, and agreed to pay an indemnity of ten millions of florins. This arrangement was immediately followed by a treaty § 6. Intervention of Prus of alliance between France and Holland, concluded at Fontainbleau on the 10th November, 1785.k This alliance was the work of the Dutch 'patriotic or sia in the in- anti-Orange party. The office of stadtholder had been reternal affairs established in 1747, in favour of William IV, of the of Holland, 1788. younger branch of the house of Orange. The victorious Schoell, Histoire abrégée des Traités de Paix, tom. iv. pp. 59-89. Flassan, Histoire de la Diplomatie Française, tom vii. pp. 399–410. Martens, Causes célèbres du Droit des Gens, tom. ii. p. 203. In the question of the free navigation of the Scheldt, the cause of the Emperor was maintained by Linguet, (Annales Politiques, Nos. 88 and 89,) whilst that of Holland was defended by Mirabeau in his Doutes sur la liberté de l'Escaut. In this work he puts the claim of Holland upon the ground of positive conventional law. "La souveraineté de ce fleuve lui a été garantie par toutes les conventions qui assurent l'existence politique de l'Europe. C'est à cette condition que les Hollandais renoncèrent aux Pays-Bas-Antrichiens. Ils ont' cent trente-cinq ans de possession. La France et l'Angleterre leur ont garanti les avantages de cette navigation, exclusivement et sans concurrence. Si pour renverser des traités positifs, on veut aujourd'hui se prevaloir du droit naturel, pourquoi toutes les puissances de l'Europe ne se reprendraient-elles pas mutuellement les provinces conquises, cédées, hérétées? L'ordre social, dit Rousseau, est un droit sacré qui sert de base à tous les autres. Cependant ce droit ne vient point de la nature; il est donc fondé sur des conventions. Les conventions sont donc la base de tous les droits. Faudra-t-il désormais les violer toutes, détruire tous les établissemens politiques, sapper toutes les autorités, et porter le trouble dans chaque état, sous pretexte d'y ramener les principes du droit naturel dont on s'est écarté, ou plutôt qu'on a violés partout? Comme la tranquillité des peuples est aussi un objet essentiel; comme le bonheur général dépend moins de quelque amélioration que de la jouissance paisible de ce qu'on possède; comme la république d'Henri IV, ou la diète européenne de l'Abbé de Saint-Pierre, ne sont encore êtablies, je soutiendrai sans remords, contre un prétendu droit naturel, que la réclamation de l'empereur este injuste, et que les autres puissances doivent l'empêcher de porter plus loin ses enterprises." We must not infer that Mirabeau was absolutely opposed to the free navigation of the Scheldt. On the contrary he endeavours to show in his fourth letter how it might be opened without danger to Holland and to Europe, viz. by the independence of Belgium constituted in the form of a federal republic, in which the United Provinces would find a pacific ally and a neutral barrier more efficient than the military barrier they had maintained with such an expense of blood and trea(Œuvres de Mirabeau, tom. v. pp. 316, 429, ed. 1821.) sure. A party was protected by England, whilst their antagonists leaned upon France. The councils of the republic were distracted by these contending factions, until the patriotic party finally obtained the ascendancy under William V, who had married a Prussian princess, sister of Frederick William II. The province of Holland suspended the stadtholder from his functions as captain general, in 1786, in consequence of an alleged abuse of his authority. The courts of Versailles and Berlin both attempted, in vain, to negotiate a compromise between the contending parties. The princess of Orange, who was about to proceed to the Hague, with the view of sustaining by her presence the party of the stadtholder, was stopped on her journey by the troops of Holland stationed on the frontiers of that province. Frederick William II demanded satisfaction for the insult thus offered to his sister, which was refused by the States General who relied on the support of France. Prussian army commanded by the Duke of Brunswick entered Holland in September, 1787; the Dutch nation, distracted by party divisions, were unable to oppose any effectual resistance; and the stadtholder was restored to the plenitude of his authority by foreign force. The French cabinet had declared to the court of London, on the 16th of September, that it would not suffer the armed interference of Prussia in the internal affairs of Holland. The British government replied by announcing its determination to support the stadtholder. This menace sufficed to induce the French cabinet to discontinue its armaments, and to exchange pacific declarations with that of London. The revolution of Holland in favour of the house of Orange was thus consummated by a military intervention, justly regarded as fatal to the political consideration of France in Europe, and inconsistent with the true principles of international law; since it could not be pretended that the safety of the neighbouring states, or the general equilibrium of national forces was disturbed by the internal dissensions of the republic. They were only fatal to the power and § 7. Triple alliance be sia and Hol land. prosperity of Holland herself. The leaders of the patriotic party, banished from their native land, found a refuge in France; and the ascendancy of the victorious faction was maintained by treaties of alliance with Great Britain and Prussia, signed on the 15th April, 1788, guarantying the hereditary stadtholderate, with all its powers and prerogatives, in the house of Orange, as an essential part of the constitution of the United Provinces. A guarantee to a nation of its internal constitution against external attack may be a lawful, and perhaps, under some circumstances, a politic engagement, tending to preserve its national freedom and independence. But if the object of the guarantee is to prevent the nation itself from making such changes as it deems fit, it becomes a mere pretext for the perpetual interference of the guarantying power in its internal affairs, of which the first fatal example was given in the partition of Poland. These treaties maintained the power of the house of tween Great Orange until 1795, when the exiled patriots returned with Britain, Prus- the invading army of republican France, and the stadtholder fled to England. These treaties constituted the Triple Alliance, which interfered at the congress of the Hague, 1790, in the dissensions between the Emperor and his revolted subjects of Belgium, for the purpose of restoring his authority and the ancient constitution of the Catholic provinces; compelled Denmark to withdraw the co-operation she had furnished Russia against Sweden in 1788; dictated the terms of peace between Austria and the Porte on the basis of the status quo ante bellum at the congress of Reichenbach in 1791; and compelled Russia to abandon her designs upon the Turkish empire at the peace of Jassy in 1792.1 Segur, Flassan, His 1 Schoel, Histoire des Traités de Paix, tom. iv. pp. 90-111. |