Life and Death of John of Barneveld, Advocate of Holland : with a view of the primary causes and movements of the Thirty Years' War, 1617 by John Lothrop Motley
page 57 of 104 (54%)
page 57 of 104 (54%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
Rombout Hoogerbeets, a member of the tribunal, informed Prince Maurice that he "would no longer be present on a bench where men disputed the authority of the States of Holland, which he held to be the supreme sovereignty over him." This was plain speaking; a distinct enunciation of what the States' right party deemed to be constitutional law. And what said Maurice in reply? "I, too, recognize the States of Holland as sovereign; but we might at least listen to each other occasionally." Hoogerbeets, however, deeming that listening had been carried far enough, decided to leave the tribunal altogether, and to resume the post which he had formerly occupied as Pensionary or chief magistrate of Leyden. Here he was soon to find himself in the thick of the conflict. Meantime the States-General, in full assembly, on 11th November 1617, voted that the National Synod should be held in the course of the following year. The measure was carried by a strict party vote and by a majority of one. The representatives of each province voting as one, there were four in favour of to three against the Synod. The minority, consisting of Holland, Utrecht, and Overyssel, protested against the vote as an outrageous invasion of the rights of each province, as an act of flagrant tyranny and usurpation. The minority in the States of Holland, the five cities often named, protested against the protest. |
|