INTRODUCTORY.

HISTORICAL parallels, whether of persons or events, show generally more ingenuity than truth. They are seldom as instructive as they are amusing; and are rarely turned to the good purposes of effective example. Few transactions in the history of any given nation resemble each other more than the Congress of Cologne, two centuries and a half ago, and the Conference of London in our own days; both held for the special and final arrangement of the affairs of the Netherlands, and both so eminently insufficient for that great object.

It is only necessary to refer to the records of those almost interminable nego

b

tiations to establish the general resemblance. The main difference is that Holland was then in the position which Belgium occupies now; the very country which then laboured to throw off the yoke now striving to maintain the dominion-its people being so changed in character as to follow the example it then struggled against. It is certainly striking and singular that the modern King of Holland should stand precisely in the situation which the King of Spain occupied in the olden time, retarding and frustrating by self-willed intolerance the settlement which he knows and feels to be inevitable. It is not, indeed, on the same grounds which supported Philip II. that William I. takes his stand. And far be it from us to insinuate any general resemblance between the bigot tyrant of old and the constitutional

monarch of to-day. It is only on the score of obstinate perseverance that the analogy exists; religious fanaticism being mainly the basis of the one, and commercial selfishness of the other. As for all the minor details-the joint protection afforded by France and England to the newly-established state; the refusal, by the rejected dynasty, to acknowledge its chief governor enthroned at Brussels; the twenty-seven articles on the one hand and the twenty-four articles on the other; the hollow arbitration of the emperor (Russia and Prussia did not then politically exist to form the trinity of despotism); the bad faith and jealousy of some governments; and the tortuous shifts of diplomacy--they show a simili. tude so marvellous, that it seems as if the master spirits of this age were forced to model their course on the errors of one

which, in common cases, they no doubt

abhor and despise.

All Europe was harrassed and convulsed by "the Dutch and Belgic question" of the sixteenth century. Το bring it if possible to a termination by means of amicable discussion, commissioners were appointed by common consent, including many men of high rank and some of consummate talent and this memorable congress assembled in the ancient city of Cologne, early in the spring of the year 1579.

The eminent persons composing the congress would have felt it little consistent with their dignity to come to the rendezvous in the unostentatious guise. of modern statesmen. The spirit of the times is happily changed; and people are now rapidly losing the veneration for factitious display, which was one great

cause of the too-long admitted influence of rank whose chief claim to distinction was riches.

The important occasion we now allude to brought together three archbishopstwo of them electors of the empire, and one the pope's nuncio-one bishop, two dukes, one count, various abbots, seigneurs, counsellors, intendants, jurisconsults and secretaries; besides a crowd of unofficial individuals, attracted to the scene and illegitimate actors in it, for the purposes of the many princes, potentates, and pretenders whose interests were involved in the great questions to be debated.

Considerable magnificence was displayed by this assemblage of functionaries. Their numerous followers and splendid retinues filled the houses of entertainment; while the influx of visitors,