EARLY BELGIAN COLONIAL EFFORTS - The University of Texas at ...

Given the limitations and inherent contradictions in the Belgian Constitution,
how did the actual relationship between the king, chambers, and ministers function at
that time? Between 1831 and 1847 Belgium was ruled by a union centrist party which
had been instrumental in the revolution that created Belgium. 81 It was in the fullest
sense a national unity party that included the liberal free masons and professionals that
had been so influenced by the French occupation of 1795-1815 and the conservative
Catholics who had demanded the catholicity of the nation and control over its
educational system. As a unity government it was an example of compromise and often
inaction. This was especially evident in the relations between the various governmental
institutions.
The Belgian Constitution had mandated a constitutional monarchy that
envisioned a king as a participant and leader, not a strong monarch. It had especially
enshrined the concept of ministerial responsibility. The difficulty was that no one was
quite sure what that meant in terms of real governmental relations, especially in terms
of the duties and obligations of the king. Leopold, however, possessed definite ideas on
what form of constitutional monarch he was to be. In his concept, he was perhaps
secondary to the Parliament in internal matters, but international relations were an area
legitimately within the king’s interest and constitutional authority. In the world of mid
nineteenth century Europe, many of the governments were monarchies that were not
constitutional like those of England and Belgium. The kings or princes of these
81 Manhès, 121-130.
44