ect for differences in religious
opinions, and leaving all churches in their freedom, they chose to compel
no man's conscience."

On the constitutional question, the States commenced by an astounding
absurdity. "These mischief-makers, moreover," said they, "have not been
ashamed to dispute, and to cause the Earl of Leicester to dispute, the
lawful constitution of the Provinces; a matter which has not been
disputed for eight hundred years."

This was indeed to claim a respectable age for their republic. Eight
hundred years took them back to the days of Charlemagne, in whose time it
would have been somewhat difficult to detect a germ of their
States-General and States-Provincial. That the constitutional
government--consisting of nobles and of the vroedschaps of chartered
cities--should have been in existence four hundred and seventeen years
before the first charter had ever been granted to a city, was a very
loose style of argument. Thomas Wilkes, in reply; might as well have
traced the English parliament to Hengist and Horsa. "For eight hundred
years;" they said, "Holland had been governed by Counts and Countesses,
on whom the nobles and cities, as representing the States, had legally
conferred sovereignty."

Now the first incorporated city of Holland and Zeeland that ever existed
was Middelburg, which received its charter from Count William I. of
Holland and Countess Joan of Flanders; in the year 1217. The first Count
that had any legal recognized authority was Dirk the First to whom
Charles the Simple presented the territory of Holland, by letters-patent,
in 922. Yet the States-General, in a solemn and eloquent document,
gravely dated their own existence from the year 787, and claimed the
regular possession and habitual delegation of sovereignty from that epoch
down!

After this fabulous preamble, they proceeded to handle the matter of fact
with logical precision. It was absurd, they said, that Mr. Wilkes and
Lord Leicester should affect to confound the persons who appeared in the
assembly with the States themselves; as if those individuals claimed or
exercised sovereignty. Any man who had observed what had been passing
during the last fifteen years, knew very well that the supreme authority
did not belong to the thirty or forty individuals who came to the
meetings . . . . The nobles, by reason of their ancient dignity and
splendid possessions, took counsel together over state matters, and then,
appearing at the a