First Stadtholderless period and the Great Assembly Politics and government of the Dutch Republic

great assembly of 1651 dirck van delen showing interior of ridderzaal @ time.

politically, staatsgezinde (republican) faction of ruling dutch regents, led such talented men johan de witt, brother cornelis de witt, cornelis de graeff, andries de graeff , andries bicker (the last 3 uncles of johan de witt s wife) dominated. fortunate republic capable leadership arose in absence of prince of orange. faction thought through ideological justification of republicanism (the true freedom ) went against contemporary european trend of monarchical absolutism, previewed modern political ideas found fullest expression in american , french constitutions of 18th century. there monarchical opposing undertow, however, adherents of house of orange wanted restore young prince of orange position of stadtholder father, grandfather, great-uncle, , great-grandfather had held. republicans attempted rule out constitutional prohibitions, act of seclusion, unsuccessful in crisis of rampjaar (year of disaster) of 1672, brought fall of de witt-regime.

the gecommitteerde raden (executive committee) of states of holland moved reassert authority on army , convened plenary session of states. next holland proposed in states general so-called great assembly (a kind of constitutional convention) should convened @ short notice, amend union of utrecht.

the states of holland did not wait assembly, however, own province started make constitutional alterations. on december 8, 1650, states formally took on stadtholders powers. eighteen voting towns in states given option apply charter enabled them henceforth elect own vroedschap members , magistrates, under ultimate supervision of states, otherwise without usual drawing of double lists, outsiders choose from. did not apply non-voting towns, however, still had present double lists, states, instead of stadtholder. states assumed power appoint magistrates in unincorporated countryside, drosten , baljuws. ·

this did imply significant change in power structure in province. position of city regents improved, while ridderschap (the oligarchical representative body of nobility in states, had 1 vote, equal 1 city) lost influence, in countryside. change diminished power of representative bodies of guilds in cities, had acted check on power of vroedschap of stadtholder. change therefore did not go unopposed, , caused rioting groups being disenfranchised.

it clear leadership of republic in hands of holland. other power center, house of orange, out of way, @ least until william iii came of age. constitutional conflict between central authority, represented princes of orange, , provincial particularism, represented states of holland, had largely been false one. since beginning of republic, these 2 institutions had largely exercised leadership in cooperation, 2 notable exceptions of maurice , oldenbarnevelt in 1618-19 , between william ii , holland in 1650. had been 1 more of form instead of deeper underlying 1 of function: lead republic. present, answer clear. leadership of state , aims of national policy lead states of holland. great assembly sealed transfer of leadership holland alone. in institutes of state, new patterns showed themselves. states general, deputies of other provinces subservient prince of orange, deferred judgment of holland.