The story

Holland III AS-32 - History

Holland III AS-32 - History



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Holland III AS-32

Holland III

(AS-32: dp. 19,000, 1. 599'; b. 83'; dr. 23'4"; s. 18 k.; cpl.
1,190; a. 2 5"; cl. Dunlop)

The third Holland was launched by Ingalls Shipbuilding Oorp., Pascagoula, Miss., 19 January 1983, sponsored by Mrs. John O. Stennis, wife of U.S. Senator from the State of Mississippi; delivered to the Charleston Naval Shipyard, Charleston, S.C.; and commissioned 7 September 1963, Captain Charles W. Styer, Jr., in command.

Holland departed Charleston on 14 October for shakedown training at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, returning to Charleston on 19 November. She commenced post-shakedown availability on 25 November.

While Holland is neither a submersible nor a combatant ship, she will be a vital link in support of our Nation's first line of deterrence—the Navy's Polaris Weapons 9ystem. She is capable of. making any submarine repair other than major overhaul, including servicing and maintaining the nuclear power plants of Polaris-flring submarines.

The opening of 1964 found Holland at Charleston, S.C., making preparations for deployment to the Polaris replenishmen,t anchorage at Rota, Spain. She arrived Rota 1 April and relieved Proteus (AS-19) as the FBM submarine tender shortly thereafter. Rolland continued her vital service to the Polaris submarines until relieved 4 November 1966. Holland arrived Charleston 22 November. There she tended submarines of the Atlantic Fleet into 1967.



Service history [ edit | edit source ]

Pacific service [ edit | edit source ]

Holland arrived in San Francisco from Puget Sound Naval Shipyard on 24 April to become flagship of Captain J. T. Thompkins, Commander Submarine Divisions, Battle Fleet. On 24 September she was permanently assigned to base at San Diego, California, tending submarine divisions there with periodic tours to Panama to service submarines based at the Canal Zone.

On 5 November 1930 Holland became flagship of Captain Chester W. Nimitz, Commander Submarine Divisions, Battle Fleet with additional duty as Commander of Submarine Division 20. The former command was abolished as of 1 April 1931 and Captain Nimitz retained his flag in Holland as Commander, of his submarine division, now designated Submarine Division 12. He left Holland on 17 June, relieved by Captain W. L. Friedell.

In addition to being the flagship of Submarine Division 12, Holland temporarily served as Submarine Force Flagship (March–July 1933). In June 1935 she became joint flagship of Submarine Squadron 6 and Submarine Division 12. This duty continued until June 1941 when she became flagship of Submarine Squadron 2.

World War II [ edit | edit source ]

On 22 November 1941 Holland arrived at Cavite Naval Base, Philippines, to service submarines of the Asiatic Fleet. Due to the air raids in early December 1941, Holland was hurried out of Manila Bay under cover of night with her vital cargo of repair and replacement parts for submarines of the Asiatic Fleet. Heading south, she escaped unscathed from two air raids while at Balikpapan, Borneo, then repaired a battle-damaged submarine at Soerabaja, Java where she was joined by two destroyers that gave her escort to Port Darwin, Australia, which she reached on 2 January 1942 for round-the-clock operations which included the building of docks and floats as well as the constant repair and equipping of ships as well as submarines. On 3 February 1942, Captain C.Q. Wright took command and she was underway for Tjilaljap, Java, to remove Rear Admiral Charles A. Lockwood, Jr., and his Asiatic Fleet Submarine Force Staff to Australia. Her outstanding service to the Fleet during the first crucial months of the war brought Holland a Navy Unit Commendation.

While based in Australia, under the command of Captain C.Q. Wright Holland serviced and overhauled several submarines before returning for overhaul at Mare Island Navy Yard in late February 1943. She reached Pearl Harbor from the West Coast in June and completed 22 refits and 13 repair jobs for submarines within the next 11 months. She shifted to Midway Atoll on 1 June 1944 and sailed the following month directly to support submarines in the Mariana Islands. Holland returned to Pearl Harbor late in November, 1944, to be fitted out as headquarters ship for Vice Admiral Charles A. Lockwood, Jr., Commander Submarine Force, Pacific Fleet. In January 1945 she steamed out of Pearl Harbor for Guam where she embarked Vice Admiral Lockwood. By the close of hostilities, Holland had given 55 instances of refit to submarines, provided repair and service to 20 surface craft and completed various jobs on shore installations.

Post-war operations [ edit | edit source ]

Vice Admiral Lockwood shifted his Submarine Force Flag ashore to his new quarters on Coconut Island in Apra Harbor on 30 August 1945, setting up operations and communications for the work ahead. This left Holland ready to begin a new career as an internal combustion engine repair ship ARG-18. Her value to the submarine force had diminished with the commissioning of many new and modern tenders better equipped to carry on the job of keeping submarines in condition for their assaults against the enemy. With a few alterations she headed for Buckner Bay, Okinawa, where she embarked Rear Admiral Allen B. Smith, Commander of Service Squadron 10 and his staff before proceeding for Tokyo Bay where she dropped anchor on 29 September 1945.

Holland set course 6 June 1946 by way of Pearl Harbor for San Diego where she arrived on 28 June. She shifted to San Pedro for inactivation overhaul in the Terminal Island Navy Yard, then was towed to San Diego where she was decommissioned on 21 March 1947. She was assigned to the San Diego, California, group of the Pacific Reserve Fleet until her name was struck from the Navy Register on 18 June 1952. Her hull was sold for scrapping on 3 October 1953 to the Bethlehem Steel Corporation.

Holland earned two battle stars and the Navy Unit Commendation for World War II service.


William I of Orange, 1579 to 1584

Having inherited estates around the area which became Holland, the young William was sent to the region and educated as a Catholic on the orders of Emperor Charles V. He served Charles and Philip II well, being appointed stadtholder in Holland. However, he refused to enforce religious laws attacking Protestants, becoming a loyal opponent and then an outright rebel. In the 1570s, William had great success in his war with the Spanish powers, becoming Stadtholder of the United Provinces. Ancestor of the Dutch monarchy, he is known as the Father of the Fatherland, Willem van Oranje, and Willem de Zwijger or William the Silent.


Edward III’s sons – starting to sort the Plantagenets out.

An article by Mark Ormrod published in 2011 in the BBC History Magazine has always stuck in my mind. Essentially Edward was an indulgent father who made big plans for his dynasty that involved crowns for his children through adoption, marriage and conquest. His sons grew up believing that they might be kings of various countries if the odds were sufficiently stacked in their favour – and having created a series of royal dukes (Edward’s two younger sons were raised to dukedoms by their nephew Richard II) it is perhaps not surprising that there was disaffection within the family. Edward’s dynastic policy required a large family. He and his wife Philippa of Hainhault were fortunate in their love for one another – England was less fortunate in the size of the Plantagenet family all of whom thought themselves worthy of a crown at a time when the occupant of the throne, Richard II (Edward’s grandson) was unable to control his ambitious, conniving relations.

It seems as good a place to start as any. It also helps that popular history gives a degree of familiarity to Edward III’s sons.

Edward, the Black Prince, from the Bruges Garter Book

Thomas of Woodstock: London, British Library Cotton MS Nero D.VIII, f. 0

Nor for that matter is sorting out their titles a linear progression. Thomas of Langley’s dukedom of Aumale was given to him by Richard II in 1385 but was then passed on by Richard to Edmund of Langley’s son Edward of Norwich in 1397 when Thomas was marched off to Calais and murdered. However, Edward of Norwich was himself stripped of the title in 1399 when his cousin became Henry IV having usurped Richard II. It’s something of a relief to report that there were no more dukes of Aumale. Henry IV recreated the title as an earldom and gave it to his son Thomas at the same time as creating him Duke of Clarence and as a duke trumps an ear, Thomas is usually known as Duke of Clarence rather than Earl of Aumale. Thomas died without children and the title became dormant (though rather like indigestion an Aumale title does return at a later date.)

The Black Prince died from dysentery and is buried in Canterbury Cathedral where his effigy and shield can still be seen. Lionel of Antwerp was murdered by his Italian in-laws in 1368. I should add that it was never proven that he was poisoned. He was buried in Milan but eventually disinterred and transported home for burial in Clare Priory, Suffolk alongside his first wife. John of Gaunt died of old age at Leicester Castle on 3rd February 1399 and was buried beside Blanche of Lancaster in St Paul’s Cathedral. Edmund of Langley died in 1402 and was buried at King’s Langley in Hertfordshire. Thomas of Woodstock was arrested on the orders of his nephew Richard II and placed in the custody of Thomas Mowbray (Duke of Norfolk), transported to Calais where he was murdered in 1397. He was eventually buried in Westminster Abbey.


Notes

Foldout maps are damaged and some areas are missing or not legible.

Addeddate 2008-10-15 15:49:41 Call number 31833011507735 Camera Canon 5D External-identifier urn:oclc:record:855530143 Foldoutcount 5 Identifier documentsrelativ01brod Identifier-ark ark:/13960/t78s5046q Pages 748 Possible copyright status NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT Ppi 500 Scandate 20081017122310 Scanfactors 1 Scanner scribe3.indiana.archive.org Scanningcenter indiana

The Destruction of Home and Hearth after the Wars

Genealogy Tips by Jeannette Holland Austin

During the Revolutionary War tombstones in local cemeteries were vandalized. This is why it is virtually impossible to locate the graves of colonial days. In Virginia, St. John's Episcopal Church in the village of Chuckatuck was thoroughly vandalized after the war, and tombstones of Loyalists removed! The church has stood for some 375 years and served as one of three parish houses in old Nansemond County. Englishmen were required to attend church, pay tithing (in tobacco), work on roads, and perform other church services. Virginians were industrious sorts, more interested in their tobacco crops than community worship service. In fact, they spent more money on the out buildings and crops than they did the actual manor house. This could provide one reason for the vandalizing, plus the cruelties imposed by the British and dire economic effects during British occupation. Whatever the reason much is lost. But so much more worse than the war as being a reason to vandalize, are the hateful groups of protesters today who know nothing of the past and destroy the monumental records of former generations.


Holland III AS-32 - History

G.A. Holland (1859-1946) moved in 1882 from his native Kentucky to Poolville, Texas, where he taught school for six years. In 1894, Holland relocated to nearby Weatherford where he was long active in business, political, and civic endeavors including being president of Citizens National Bank and mayor. He constructed Holland's Lake, a popular local fishing and swimming hole, and moved historic log cabins to the site to house his collection of museum artifacts. Holland also authored a history of Parker County. G.M. Bowie (1846-1918), a native of Scotland, came to Texas in 1868 and briefly taught school in Black Springs (now Oran) on the Parker-Jack county line. Moving to Weatherford, he became a partner in the lumber firm of Wm. Cameron & Company. Bowie moved to White Castle, Louisiana, circa 1891 to operate the company cypress lumber and shingle mill. He returned to Weatherford in 1897 where he remained active in business and civic affairs for the remainder of his life.

Scope and Contents

The Bowie and Holland Families Papers are comprised of photocopied correspondence, newspaper clippings, genealogical information, legal documents, printed materials and 69 digital scans documenting the achievements of G.A. Holland and G.M. Bowie and their families. Highlights of the collection include scans of formal family portraits and snapshots, including photographs of a 1912 road trip made by Sam White, Barney Holland, and Lem Scarbrough from Weatherford to San Francisco and back in a Stoddard-Dayton 48 Saybrook automobile. An inventory of Holland's Log Cabin Museum items given to the Fort Worth Children's Museum (now the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History), a 1930 catalog of the Parker County Fair, and constitution and by-laws of the Pioneer Association of Parker County are also among the materials.

Restrictions

Access

Literary Rights Statement

Permission to publish, reproduce, distribute, or use by any and all other current or future developed methods or procedures must be obtained in writing from Special Collections, The University of Texas at Arlington Library. All rights are reserved and retained regardless of current or future development or laws that may apply to fair use standards.

Index Terms

Administrative Information

Provenance

Gift of Barney B. Holland, Jr., 2011.

Citation

Bowie and Holland Families Papers, 1886-1990, Unprocessed Manuscript 2012-38, Box Number, Folder Number, Special Collections, The University of Texas at Arlington Library.


Dutch War

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Dutch War, also called Franco-dutch War, (1672–78), the second war of conquest by Louis XIV of France, whose chief aim in the conflict was to establish French possession of the Spanish Netherlands after having forced the Dutch Republic’s acquiescence. The Third Anglo-Dutch War (1672–74) formed part of this general war.

After having signed (1670) the secret Treaty of Dover with England against the Dutch, Louis mounted an invasion of the Dutch Republic in May 1672 that was supported by the British navy. The French were able to quickly occupy three of the seven Dutch provinces, but then the Dutch opened the dikes around Amsterdam, flooding a large area, and their army, under William III of Orange, rallied behind this “Water Line.” By autumn William had begun land operations against the French invaders. Meanwhile, the Dutch navy, under Admiral M.A. de Ruyter, managed to stave off attacking English and French fleets in battles off Sole Bay in 1672 and off Ostend and Kijkduin in 1673, each time frustrating an invasion of the republic. England then made peace with the Dutch in the Treaty of Westminster of February 1674. In 1673 Spain, the Holy Roman emperor, and Lorraine took the side of the Dutch against France, and so by the end of 1673 the French had been driven out of the Dutch Republic.

But from 1674 to 1678 the French armies, with Sweden as their only effective ally, managed to advance steadily in the southern (Spanish) Netherlands and along the Rhine, defeating the badly coordinated forces of the Grand Alliance with regularity. Eventually the heavy financial burdens of the war, along with the imminent prospect of England’s reentry into the conflict on the side of the Dutch, convinced Louis to make peace despite his advantageous military position. The resulting Treaties of Nijmegen (1678–79) between France and the Grand Alliance left the Dutch Republic intact and France generously aggrandized in the Spanish Netherlands.


History of Holland By George Edmundson

William III succeeded to the throne at a moment of transition. He was thirty-two years of age, and his natural leanings were autocratic but he accepted loyally the principle of ministerial responsibility, and throughout his long reign endeavoured honestly and impartially to fulfil his duties as a constitutional sovereign. There were at this time in Holland four political parties: (1) the old conservative party, which after 1849 gradually dwindled in numbers and soon ceased to be a power in the State (2) the liberals, under the leadership of Thorbecke (3) the anti-revolutionary or orthodox Protestant party, ably led by G. Groen van Prinsterer, better known perhaps as a distinguished historian, but at the same time a good debater and resourceful parliamentarian (4) the Catholic party. The Catholics for the first time obtained in 1849 the full privileges of citizenship. They owed this to the liberals, and for some years they gave their support to that party, though differing from them fundamentally on many points. The anti-revolutionaries placed in the foreground the upholding of the Reformed (orthodox Calvinistic) faith in the State, and of religious teaching in the schools. In this last article of their political creed they were at one with the Catholics, and in its defence the two parties were destined to become allies.

The liberal majority in the newly elected States-General was considerable and it was the general expectation that Thorbecke would become head of the government. The king however suspected the aims of the liberal leader, and personally disliked him. He therefore kept in office the Donker-Curtius-De Kempenaer cabinet but, after a vain struggle against the hostile majority, it was compelled to resign, and Thorbecke was called upon to form a ministry.

Thorbecke was thus the first constitutional prime-minister of Holland. His answer to his opponents, who asked for his programme, was contained in words which he was speedily to justify: “Wait for our deeds.” A law was passed which added 55,000 votes to the electorate and by two other laws the provincial and communal assemblies were placed upon a popular representative basis. The system of finance was reformed by the gradual substitution of direct for indirect taxation. By the Navigation Laws all differential and transit dues upon shipping were reduced tolls on through-cargoes on the rivers were abolished, and the tariff on raw materials lowered. It was a considerable step forward in the direction of free-trade. Various changes were made to lighten the incidence of taxation on the poorer classes. Among the public works carried to completion at this time (1852) was the empoldering of the Haarlem lake, which converted a large expanse of water into good pasture land.

It was not on political grounds that the Thorbecke ministry was to be wrecked, but by their action in matters which aroused religious passions and prejudices. The prime-minister wished to bring all charitable institutions and agencies under State supervision. Their number was more than 3500 and a large proportion of these were connected with and supported by religious bodies. It is needless to say the proposal aroused strong opposition. More serious was the introduction of a Catholic episcopate into Holland. By the Fundamental Law of 1848 complete freedom of worship and of organisation had been guaranteed to every form of religious belief. It was the wish of the Catholics that the system which had endured ever since the 16th century of a “Dutch mission” under the direction of an Italian prelate (generally the internuncio) should come to an end, and that they should have bishops of their own. The proposal was quite constitutional and, far from giving the papal curia more power in the Netherlands, it decreased it. A petition to Pius IX in 1847 met with little favour at Rome but in 1851 another petition, much more widely signed, urged the Pope to seize the favourable opportunity for establishing a native hierarchy. Negotiations were accordingly opened by the papal see with the Dutch government, which ended (October, 1852) in a recognition of the right of the Catholic Church in Holland to have freedom of organisation. It was stipulated, however, that a previous communication should be made to the government of the papal intentions and plans, before they were carried out. The only communication that was made was not official, but confidential and it merely stated that Utrecht was to be erected into an archbishopric with Haarlem, Breda, Hertogenbosch and Roeremonde, as suffragans. The ministry regarded the choice of such Protestant centres as Utrecht and Haarlem with resentment, but were faced with the fait accompli. This strong-handed action of the Roman authorities was made still more offensive by the issuing of a papal allocution, again without any consultation with the Dutch government, in which Pius IX described the establishment of the new hierarchy as a means of counteracting in the Netherlands the heresy of Calvin.

A wave of fierce indignation swept over Protestant Holland, which united in one camp orthodox Calvinists (anti-revolutionaries), conservatives and anti-papal liberals. The preachers everywhere inveighed against a ministry which had permitted such an act of aggression on the part of a foreign potentate against the Protestantism of the nation. Utrecht took the lead in drawing up an address to the king and to the States-General (which obtained two hundred thousand signatures), asking them not to recognise the proposed hierarchy. At the meeting of the Second Chamber of the States-General on April 12, Thorbecke had little difficulty in convincing the majority that the Pope had proceeded without Consultation with the ministry, and that under the Constitution the Catholics had acted within their rights in re-modelling their Church organisation. But his arguments were far from satisfying outside public opinion. On the occasion of a visit of the king to Amsterdam the ministry took the step of advising him not to receive any address hostile to the establishment of the hierarchy, on the ground that this did not require the royal approval. William, who had never been friendly to Thorbecke, was annoyed at being thus instructed in the discharge of his duties and he not only received an address containing 51,000 signatures but expressed his great pleasure in being thus approached (April 15). At the same time he summoned Van Hall, the leader of the opposition, to Amsterdam for a private consultation. The ministry, on hearing of what had taken place, sent its resignation, which was accepted on April 19. Thus fell the Thorbecke ministry, not by a parliamentary defeat, but because the king associated himself with the uprising of hostile public opinion, known as the “April Movement.”

A new ministry was formed under the joint leadership of Van Hall and Donker-Curtius and an appeal to the electors resulted in the defeat of the liberals. The majority was a coalition of conservatives and anti-revolutionaries. The followers of Groen van Prinsterer were small in number, but of importance through the strong religious convictions and debating ability of the leader. The presence of Donker-Curtius was a guarantee for moderation and, as Van Hall was an adept in political opportunism, the new ministry differed from its liberal predecessor chiefly in its more cautious attitude towards the reforms which both were ready to adopt. As it had been carried into office by the April Movement, a Church Association Bill was passed into law making it illegal for a foreigner to hold any Church office without the royal assent, and forbidding the wearing of a distinctive religious dress outside closed buildings. Various measures were introduced dealing with ministerial responsibility, poor-law administration and other matters, such as the abolition of the excise on meat and of barbarous punishments on the scaffold.

The question of primary education was to prove for the next half-century a source of continuous political and religious strife, dividing the people of Holland into hostile camps. The question was whether the State schools should be “mixed” i.e. neutral schools, where only those simple truths which were common to all denominations should be taught or should be “separate” i.e. denominational schools, in which religious instruction should be given in accordance with the wishes of the parents. A bill was brought in by the government (September, 1854) which was intended to be a compromise. It affirmed the general principle that the State schools should be “neutral,” but allowed “separate” schools to be built and maintained. This proposal was fiercely opposed by Groen and gave rise to a violent agitation. The ministry struggled on, but its existence was precarious and internal dissensions at length led to its resignation (July, 1856). The elections of 1856 had effected but little change in the constitution of the Second Chamber, and the anti-revolutionary J.J.L. van der Brugghen was called upon to form a ministry. Groen himself declined office, Van der Brugghen made an effort to conciliate opposition and a bill for primary education was introduced (1857) upholding the principle of the “mixed” schools, but with the proviso that the aim of the teaching was to be the instruction of the children “in Christian and social virtues" at the same time “separate” schools were permitted and under certain conditions would be subsidised by the State. Groen again did his utmost to defeat this bill, but he was not successful and after stormy debates it became law (July, 1857). The liberals obtained a majority at the elections of 1858, and Van der Brugghen resigned. But the king would not send for Thorbecke and J.J. Rochussen, a former governor-general of the Dutch East Indies, was asked to form a “fusion” ministry. During his tenure of office (1858-60) slavery was abolished in the East Indies, though not the cultivation-system, which was but a kind of disguised slavery. The way in which the Javanese suffered by this system of compulsory labour for the profit of the home country–the amount received by the Dutch treasury being not less than 250 million florins in thirty years–was now scathingly exposed by the brilliant writer Douwes Dekker. He had been an official in Java, and his novel Max Havelaar, published in 1860 under the pseudonym “Multatuli,” was widely read, and brought to the knowledge of the Dutch public the character of the system which was being enforced.

Holland was at this time far behind Belgium in the construction of a system of railroads, to the great hindrance of trade. A bill, however, proposed by the ministry to remedy this want was rejected by the First Chamber, and Rochussen resigned. The king again declined to send for Thorbecke and Van Hall was summoned for the third time to form a ministry. He succeeded in securing the passage of a proposal to spend not less than 10 million florins annually in the building of State railways. All Van Hall’s parliamentary adroitness and practised opportunism could not, however, long maintain in office a ministry supported cordially by no party. Van Hall gave up the unthankful task (February, 1861), but still it was not Thorbecke, but Baron S. van Heemstra that was called upon to take his place. For a few months only was the ministry able to struggle on in the face of a liberal majority. There was now no alternative but to offer the post of first minister to Thorbecke, who accepted the office (January 31, 1862).

The second ministry of Thorbecke lasted for four years, and was actively engaged during that period in domestic, trade and colonial reforms. Thorbecke, as a free-trader, at once took in hand the policy of lowering all duties except for revenue purposes. The communal dues were extinguished. A law for secondary and technical education was passed in 1863 and in the same year slavery was abolished in Surinam and the West Indies. Other bills were passed for the canalising of the Hook of Holland, and the reclaiming of the estuary of the Y. This last project included the construction of a canal, the Canal of Holland, with the artificial harbour of Ymuiden at its entrance, deep enough for ocean liners to reach Amsterdam. With the advent of Fransen van de Putte, as colonial minister in 1863, began a series of far-reaching reforms in the East Indies, including the lowering of the differential duties. His views, however, concerning the scandal of the cultivation-system in Java did not meet with the approval of some of his colleagues and Thorbecke himself supported the dissentients. The ministry resigned, and Van de Putte became head of the government. He held office for four months only. His bill for the abolition of the cultivation-system and the conversion of the native cultivators into possessors of their farms was thrown out by a small majority, Thorbecke with a few liberals and some Catholics voting with the conservatives against it. This was the beginning of a definite liberal split, which was to continue for years.

A coalition-ministry followed under the presidency of J. van Heemskerk (Interior) and Baron van Zuylen van Nyevelt (Foreign Affairs). The colonial minister Mijer shortly afterwards resigned in order to take the post of governor-general of the East Indies. This appointment did not meet with the approval of the Second Chamber and the government suffered a defeat. On this they persuaded the king not only to dissolve the Chamber, but to issue a proclamation impressing upon the electors the need of the country for a more stable administration. The result was the return of a majority for the Heemskerk-Van Zuylen combination. It is needless to say that Thorbecke and his followers protested strongly against the dragging of the king’s name into a political contest, as gravely unconstitutional. The ministry had a troubled existence.

The results of the victory of Prussia over Austria at Sadowa, and the formation of the North German Confederation under Prussian leadership, rendered the conduct of foreign relations a difficult and delicate task, especially as regards Luxemburg and Limburg, both of which were under the personal sovereignty of William III, and at the same time formed part of the old German Confederation. The rapid success of Prussia had seriously perturbed public opinion in France and Napoleon III, anxious to obtain some territorial compensation which would satisfy French amour-propre, entered into negotiations with William III for the sale of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg. The king was himself alarmed at the Prussian annexations, and Queen Sophie and the Prince of Orange had decided French leanings and, as Bismarck had given the king reason to believe that no objection would be raised, the negotiations for the sale were seriously undertaken. On March 26, 1867, the Prince of Orange actually left the Hague, bearing the document containing the Grand Duke’s consent and on April 1 the cession was to be finally completed. On that very day the Prussian ambassadors at Paris and the Hague were instructed to say that any cession of Luxemburg to France would mean war with Prussia. It was a difficult situation and a conference of the Great Powers met at London on May 11 to deal with it. Its decision was that Luxemburg should remain as an independent state, whose neutrality was guaranteed collectively by the Powers, under the sovereignty of the House of Nassau that the town of Luxemburg should be evacuated by its Prussian garrison and that Limburg should henceforth be an integral part of the kingdom of the Netherlands.

Van Zuylen was assailed in the Second Chamber for his exposing the country to danger and humiliation in this matter and the Foreign Office vote was rejected by a small majority. The ministry resigned but, rather than address himself to Thorbecke, the king sanctioned a dissolution, with the result of a small gain of seats to the liberals. Heemskerk and Van Zuylen retained office for a short time in the face of adverse votes, but finally resigned and the king had no alternative but to ask Thorbecke to form a ministry. He himself declined office, but he chose a cabinet of young liberals who had taken no part in the recent political struggles, P.P. van Bosse becoming first minister.

From this time forward there was no further attempt on the part of the royal authority to interfere in the constitutional course of parliamentary government. Van Bosse’s ministry, scoffingly called by their opponents “Thorbecke’s marionettes,” maintained themselves in office for two years(1868-70), passing several useful measures, but are chiefly remembered for the abolition of capital punishment. The outbreak of the Franco-German war in 1870 found, however, the Dutch army and fortresses ill-prepared for an emergency, when the maintenance of strict neutrality demanded an efficient defence of the frontiers. The ministry was not strong enough to resist the attacks made upon it and at last the real leader of the liberal party, the veteran Thorbecke, formed his third ministry (January, 1871). But Thorbecke was now in ill-health, and the only noteworthy achievement of his last premiership was an agreement with Great Britain by which the Dutch possessions on the coast of Guinea were ceded to that country in exchange for a free hand being given to the Dutch in Surinam. The ministry, having suffered a defeat on the subject of the cost of the proposed army re-organisation, was on the point of resigning, when Thorbecke suddenly died (June 5, 1872). His death brought forth striking expressions of sympathy and appreciation from men and journals representing all parties in the State. For five-and-twenty years, in or out of office, his had been the dominating influence in Dutch politics and it was felt on all sides that the country was the poorer for the loss of a man of outstanding ability and genuine patriotism.

This eBook of “History of Holland” by George Edmundson belongs to the public domain. Complete book.
Authorama - Classic Literature, free of copyright. About.


History of Holland, (Cambridge historical series)
By George Edmundson
At Amazon


Another Anne of York

A niece of Anne of York, the daughter of Anne's brother Edward IV, was also called Anne of York. The younger Anne of York was the countess of Surrey and lived from 1475 to 1511. She married Thomas Howard, third duke of Norfolk. Anne of York, countess of Surrey, took part in the christenings of her nephew, Arthur Tudor, and of her niece, Margaret Tudor, children of Henry VII and Elizabeth of York. The children of Anne of York, countess of Surrey, all predeceased her.


Watch the video: Hollandcup 2017 Jose Stienstra Holland Messi v Le Dobry IPO III Obedience 93P (August 2022).