250 TlMEHRI. 
which the Government adhered to the same leading prin- 
ciple and advocated the system ot 1682, which she de- 
clared was ''intimately connected with the welfare and 
" prosperity of the inhabitants and highly advantageous 
" to the development of the great resources of the colony ; 
"and, in the meantime, the best mode to secure the 
" efficiency and stability of the local Governments." A 
change of the Ministry caused the withdrawal of this 
bill, which had passed its first stage in the Chambers and 
was supported, in its principle, by petitions, both from 
home and from the colony. It was not discussed. The new 
Ministry of 1857, conservative, declined however, to 
adhere to the system advocated by its predecessors, and 
refused to re-introduce the bill. The reasons given at 
the time to justify its conduct were "that the Home 
" Government then contemplated the emancipation of 
" the slaves in the West Indies and considered it hazard- 
" ous, under the circumstances, to introduce and 
" establish a system of Government by which the power 
" and authority of the local Colonial Government were 
" curtailed, and, by granting a right of direct representa- 
" tion to the inhabitants, the immediate influence of the 
" population on the conducting of the affairs and the 
" administration of the colony immoderately and un- 
" advisably extended and increased." The reform was 
retarded. 
Shortly after the Ministry laying its views before the 
Chambers, I published and defended in Leyden my In- 
augural Dissertation to be graduated as Doctor of Law 
of the University. Its subject matter was the " Reform of 
" the system of Government in the Dutch West Indies." 
