the demands of the confederates. But the next question that arose was
to determine whether it would be advisable immediately to promulgate
this mitigated form, or moderation, as it was commonly called, or to
submit it first to the king for his ratification. The privy council who
maintained that it would be presumptuous to take a step so important and
so contrary to the declared sentiments of the monarch without having
first obtained his sanction, opposed the vote of the Prince of Orange
who supported the former proposition. Besides, they urged, there was
cause to fear that it would not even content the nation.

A "moderation" devised with the assent of the states was what they
particularly insisted on. In order, therefore, to gain the consent of
the states, or rather to obtain it from them by stealth, the regent
artfully propounded the question to the provinces singly, and first of
all to those which possessed the least freedom, such as Artois, Namur,
and Luxemburg. Thus she not only prevented one province encouraging
another in opposition, but also gained this advantage by it, that the
freer provinces, such as Flanders and Brabant, which were prudently
reserved to the last, allowed themselves to be carried away by the
example of the others. By a very illegal procedure the representatives
of the towns were taken by surprise, and their consent exacted before
they could confer with their constituents, while complete silence was
imposed upon them with regard to the whole transaction. By these means
the regent obtained the unconditional consent of some of the provinces
to the "moderation," and, with a few slight changes, that of other
provinces. Luxemburg and Namur subscribed it without scruple. The
states of Artois simply added the condition that false informers should
be subjected to a retributive penalty; those of Hainault demanded that
instead of confiscation of the estates, which directly militated against
their privileges, another discretionary punishment should be introduced.