Before passing to the study of this capital question, the Chamber passed a Bill somewhat modifying the law of divorce, and another Bill as to a weekly holiday for the working-classes. This last measure raised very many objections-based partly upon the numerous exceptions which it had been found necessary to attach to the operation of the principle of the Bill, and partly and more specially upon the fact that it fixed upon Sunday as the weekly day of rest. The Liberal party alleged with vehemence that this last provision constituted a violation of Clause 15 of the Constitution and that it possessed without doubt a definitely religious quality. Nevertheless the clause in question was carried by 129 to 29 votes, the Socialists voting with the Right, and the Bill in its entirety was adopted by 138 against 38 nonvoters. The Liberal party to a man abstained from voting. One abstention which was much noticed and caused a good deal of surprise was that of the Prime Minister who declared that he had not voted for the measure because it did not satisfy him in any way, and he had not voted against it because, owing to the numerous modifications which the original draft had undergone, the new law did not threaten any important interest.

The proposed scheme for the works to be carried out at Antwerp roused public attention much more keenly, and fanned into full flame the deep dissensions which had been smouldering more or less actively in the bosom of the Catholic party. The proposal presented to the Chamber by the Government allowed, on the one hand, for the improvement of the maritime facilities of the port of Antwerp, which had been hindered in its expansion by the existing enceinte. On the other hand it arranged for the improved defence of the city, which is the most important position in Belgium in case of war, and which no longer met modern military requirements, and would do so still less when a part of the existing lines of defence should have been encroached upon by the works for the enlargement of the port. The Government proposals, elaborated after mature and lengthy study, estimated at 108,000,000 francs the necessary cost of the military works. From their first appearance these proposals, especially on their military side, roused a lively opposition in the ranks of the Right. Disregarding the importance of the question from the point of view of national defence, a large part of the Catholic Press hastened to point out the troublesome consequences which would ensue for the Catholic party from this measure at the next election. In order to check this newspaper agitation the Catholic leader, M. Woeste, intervened with energy, earnestly contending that the interests of the nation as a whole ought to take precedence of every other interest, and that in this case the future security of the country was at stake. Nevertheless in the Chamber among the members of the Right hostility to the measure, maintained notably by M. Beernaert, the former Catholic Premier, remained such that in June the position of the Ministry appeared far from secure.

The opposition to the Antwerp project was formed partly of members really and irreconcilably anti-military and partly of a group of Catholic deputies personally hostile to M. de Smet de Naeyer, the Prime Minister. It was extremely persistent and he was unable to make headway against it. At different times he had insisted upon the absolute necessity of the Chamber's pronouncing without delay upon this question, and moreover he had steadily declared that the two parts of the scheme were intimately connected and could not be separated. In spite of these declarations, however, one of the most influential members of the Right demanded that the debate should be postponed till the month of October, the Chamber, in his opinion, not having sufficient information on which to act; and the Government felt constrained to yield in this respect.

At the renewal of the debates in October, in the hope of restoring harmony among the majority, M. de Smet de Naeyer modified his first project, omitting certain important points which had appeared in the original draft, and at last bringing the total military cost down from the sum of 108,000,000 to that of 63,000,000 francs. The Liberal and Socialist opposition did not fail to remark that it was very strange that a proposal so important, which had been the subject of such profound study, and which the Government had declared to involve the indispensable minimum for securing the effectual defence of Antwerp, could be so considerably reduced without the country suffering, and added that it must be to satisfy the opponents in its own party that the Government had yielded once again. And such, indeed, was the fact.

In the course of the debate a very violent altercation took place between M. Woeste and M. Beernaert, the former accusing the latter openly of having led all the late intrigues against the present Cabinet in the hope of upsetting it and replacing it by one of his forming. This incident, which produced a very lively agitation, showed clearly how deep-seated were the differences among the Catholic party. Whatever may be the solution of the question of the defences of Antwerp, which at the end of the year still remained unsettled, it absorbed a great deal of public attention. On more than one occasion in the course of the national festivities the King expressed himself in the clearest terms as to the importance to the country of the adoption of the scheme submitted to the Chamber. For instance in June he spoke as follows: "My Government is engaged in presenting to the Chamber patriotic measures, whose adoption is necessary to our prosperity and to the security of our country. Belgium is a country of freedom, with her destiny in her hands, and that destiny will be what Belgium pleases to make it." A month later, at Brussels, he spoke again with much earnestness to a similar effect: "May the seventy-fifth anniversary of our independence," his Majesty then said, "be memorable for the adoption of the excellent scheme submitted to the Chamber,

the most useful that has been presented since 1834-since the Bill which established our railways, the first on the Continent. This measure provides a modern basis for our commercial prosperity and guarantees its security without increasing the taxes by a centime or the contingent by a man."

In the midst of these serious preoccupations public opinion did not cease to keep up a lively interest in the British agitation in regard to the alleged abuses in the Congo Free State. Strange as it may seem to English readers, the report of the Commission appointed to inquire into these allegations (dealt with later in Mr. Whates's African chapter) appears to have been regarded by many Belgians as showing that whereever criminal acts had been committed in the Congo territories against the natives they had been severely punished by the law, and that no blame attached to the authorities of the State. Still it was recognised that grave abuses had been brought to light, for the remedying of which the Commission made important recommendations. Immediately after the issue of the Report, the Government of the Congo Free State appointed a Commission composed of men of mark, drawn for the most part from the chief magistrates of Belgium, and including notably a member of the permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague, to study the conclusions of the Report and to discover the practical means of carrying them into effect. This step was regarded in Belgium as indeed hardly likely to put a stop to the British agitation, but as nevertheless proving the loyalty of intention of the Free State Government and their steady desire to leave no stone unturned in promoting the welfare of the people of that vast country.

The death of the Count of Flanders, brother of the King, which occurred on November 17, had no great political importance-the Count always having lived in the greatest retirement. By his death his son, Prince Albert, became heir presumptive to the throne of Belgium.

II. THE NETHERLANDS.

The fall of the Conservative Ministry under Dr. Kuyper was the most important political event of the year.

In spite of the victory won in the preceding year by the Conservative party on the renewal of the First Chamber, which had been dissolved because it had rejected Dr. Kuyper's scheme for higher education, it was plain, from many indications, that public opinion was turning against the policy followed during the past four years. The Government was blamed especially for the reactionary character of the measure just referred toand further, Dr. Kuyper was personally blamed for his increasing interference with the Department for Foreign Affairs. Thus, early in the year, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, M. Melvil van Linden, having resigned, a Socialist deputy questioned Dr. Kuyper angrily on the subject of this unexplained

resignation, alleging that he, Minister of the Interior, had constantly taken the place of his colleague for Foreign Affairs, notably in the negotiations connected with the termination of the war in the Transvaal, and on present questions connected with the Russo-Japanese war. Dr. Kuyper defended himself energetically from the charge of interference with the affairs of the Foreign Office, but his explanations were not thought satisfactory by all, and a Liberal-Democratic deputy declared that the motives for the resignation of M. van Linden had not been cleared up by Dr. Kuyper's speech. The portfolio for Foreign Affairs being thus vacant, was given, after several weeks' delay, to M. van Weede van Boorsenkamp, Dutch Minister at Vienna.

The

As might have been expected, the Higher Education Bill, rejected in 1904 by the First Chamber, was passed in 1905 by 27 to 5, the Right against the Left. Shortly after, in conformity with the law which decrees that the Second Chamber should be re-elected every four years, the elections took place. Second Chamber at this time was composed of 58 Ministerialists, and of 42 anti-Ministerialists, divided into Liberals of various shades, and Socialists. In view of the electoral struggle, two of the three chief factions of the Liberal party, the advanced Liberals and the Democratic Liberals, combined on the basis of the principle of universal suffrage. They separated themselves on this point from the group of old Liberals, who did not wish. for universal suffrage, and also from the Socialists, who desired the reform to be made at once, by revising the Constitution in this respect; whereas the allied Liberals did not wish to see the principle of universal suffrage inserted immediately into the Constitution, though they were of opinion that the question of its being so inserted ought to be seriously considered.

Thanks to this alliance, which at any rate partly put an end to the dissensions which had so long divided the Liberal party, the latter found itself in the most favourable condition possible for the electoral struggle. The Conservative majority disappeared, and the new Chamber was found to consist of 52 anti-Ministerialists (of whom 45 were Liberals and 7 Socialists) and only 48 Ministerialists. It is worthy of note, moreover, that the two groups most entirely devoted to Dr. Kuyper, the Anti-Revolutionaries and the Historical Christians, were those who lost most in the elections.

As a consequence of these elections, which took place in June, the Kuyper Cabinet placed its resignation in the hands of the Queen, who called on M. Borgesius, the leader of the Liberal Union, to form a Government. A few weeks later the new Cabinet was formed as follows: Minister of Finance and President of the Council, M. Demeester; Minister for Foreign Affairs, M. van Tets; Minister of Justice, M. van Raalte; Minister of the Interior, M. Rink; Minister of the Marine, Lieutenant-Captain Cohen-Stuart; Minister for War, General Staal; Minister of

Y

Public Works, Commerce and Industry, M. Kraus; Labour Minister, M. Voogens; and Colonial Minister, M. Fock.

At the opening of the session of the States General (Sept. 15) Queen Wilhelmina read the Speech from the Throne, in which, without the slightest allusion to the circumstances which had brought about the fall of the last Ministry, she declared the political programme of the new Government. On many points this programme was the same as that of the former Cabinet, notably in all that concerned various social measures which had not yet been passed into law. Among other things the Royal Speech announced the introduction of the principle of conditional release of first offenders; the extension of the benefits of the law of insurance against accidents to agricultural labourers, fishermen and sailors; a law on the tracing of parentage; and a law concerning the preparatory training of the young, with a view to preparing the whole nation to bear arms; and finally the Speech from the Throne announced certain modifications of the Constitution. The Speech was also much concerned with financial matters, an important deficit being foreseen, for meeting which it would be necessary to take measures.

In the course of the debate on the Speech from the Throne, a Moderate Liberal asked why M. Borgesius, who had undertaken to form the new Ministry, had not taken any post himself. The chief of the Cabinet answered that, seeing the weak majority at the disposal of the Liberal party, there could be no question of a Ministry with pronounced leanings; but on the contrary, it was necessary to adopt a conciliatory policy, and that in this state of things M. Borgesius, who had been the leading spirit of the electoral struggle, was not the man best qualified to succeed in the undertaking.

In execution of the Government programme, a Commission of seven members was appointed by Royal decree, to examine the grounds for proceeding to revise the Constitution, not on the question of representation, on which the Government reserved to itself the right to bring forward whatever proposals it considered useful or necessary, but on any other modifications which it might be advisable to make. As the Minister of the Interior said, when the Commission was appointed, its principal object would be to examine modifications of the Constitution as to the composition of the First Chamber, proportional representation, the length of sessions, and the salary to be granted to members of the States General. Among the modifications which this Commission would be invited to propose in relation to the First Chamber, there would be the concession to it of the right of amending Bills coming up from the Second Chamber. Hitherto, if, while approving of a Bill as a whole, the First Chamber desired to make any alterations in detail, the only way open to it was to reject the Bill as a whole, with a view to its being re-introduced in the Second Chamber and sent up in an amended form. This had led to great waste of time, which the Com