In Moldavia and Wallachia alike, the unionist camps of all hues agreed on the core agenda, with demands which they presented to the overseeing powers: the unification under the name of "Romania", with the election of a foreign hereditary Domnitor; increased autonomy toward the Ottoman Empire, with the (re)introduction of Capitulations; a new Divan with a fuller democratic mandate.
Bibescu openly supported the election of Westerner, but for particular reasons: he argued that a European prince could not only pacify tensions between the classes, but also instill a greater political ideal.
A main issue of contention between conservative and radical unionists was that of electoral law and philosophy: radicals such as Rosetti felt themselves bound by an imperative mandate, or "dutiful program", whereas conservatives rejected such notions as impinging on individual freedom.
Persuaded by Concordia leftists, a majority of the Divan agreed on the notion of unicameralism, viewing upper houses as a throwback to the Regulamentul era.

The four principles were drafted into a motion, carried by unanimous suffrage on October 21 (November 2).
Its consultative function fulfilled, the Divan only survived to late December 1857, closing some days after the Moldavian assembly.
By then, as the attention moved to social issues, the conservative and liberal factions were again emerging, and clashing.
Robescu and other right-wing unionists signaled this by asking that positive references to the peasant revolt of 1821 be erased from the Divan's addresses.
In October, Bibescu warned that party politics were the sordid future of the post-union era, "making this forsaken country of ours into an arena, collecting all her strengths and vitality".

In late November, more controversy was sparked by the letter sent to the Moldavian Divan, which A. G. Golescu described as "unbecoming and dangerous", initiating a public dispute with the other deputies.
On November 27, Bibescu resigned and left the country, arguing that progressive elements, though a minority of the country, were "imposing their ruinous politicking on the majority".
On the right, the Știrbeists were evasive on the topic of union: Știrbei and his son George Barbu were hopeful that they could preserve friendly relations with the Ottoman Empire, which they prioritized over the nationalist goals.

Another rift opposed the landed or urban classes to the peasantry.
During the election, Conservatorul had alleged that peasants were not interested in the vote, describing peasant candidates to a boyar assembly as "sheep among wolves".
In the peasant college of Vâlcea County, interest in voting had been marginal, possibly a sign that this class did not find itself represented.
In one Divan session, peasant deputy Gheorghe Lupașcu advanced a concrete proposal for direct suffrage.
Described as untimely by Crețulescu, it was withdrawn by its proponent; a motion was passed according to which the Divan would refrain from ruling on electoral matters.

As explained in a speech by Ion Brătianu, nominally a leader of the "far-left", all middle- and upper-class deputies agreed on not instituting or demanding universal suffrage.
Overall, Brătianu advocated class collaboration for "the general interest", hoping not to antagonize the conservatives.
The same ideal was championed by Vasile Boerescu in his newspaper Naționalul, published from December 1857: though discussing the peasantry's "precarious state", he also advised self-restraint on both sides of the social divide.
In its final sessions, the Divan heard another plea from peasant delegates Constantin Tănase of Olt and Marin Pârcălăbescu of Romanați, who demanded "laws based on justice" and an increased electoral weight for the peasantry.
Debates over the suspension of the corvée ensued, with the boyars advancing their own report.
It restated that land used by the peasants was boyar property paid for in labor, and noted that mechanized agriculture and the resulting drop of labor costs justified maintaining and expanding the corvée.
In Moldavia and Wallachia alike, the unionist camps of all hues agreed on the core agenda, with demands which they presented to the overseeing powers: the unification under the name of "Romania", with the election of a foreign hereditary Domnitor; increased autonomy toward the Ottoman Empire, with the (re)introduction of Capitulations; a new Divan with a fuller democratic mandate. Bibescu openly supported the election of Westerner, but for particular reasons: he argued that a European prince could not only pacify tensions between the classes, but also instill a greater political ideal. A main issue of contention between conservative and radical unionists was that of electoral law and philosophy: radicals such as Rosetti felt themselves bound by an imperative mandate, or "dutiful program", whereas conservatives rejected such notions as impinging on individual freedom. Persuaded by Concordia leftists, a majority of the Divan agreed on the notion of unicameralism, viewing upper houses as a throwback to the Regulamentul era.
The four principles were drafted into a motion, carried by unanimous suffrage on October 21 (November 2). Its consultative function fulfilled, the Divan only survived to late December 1857, closing some days after the Moldavian assembly. By then, as the attention moved to social issues, the conservative and liberal factions were again emerging, and clashing. Robescu and other right-wing unionists signaled this by asking that positive references to the peasant revolt of 1821 be erased from the Divan's addresses. In October, Bibescu warned that party politics were the sordid future of the post-union era, "making this forsaken country of ours into an arena, collecting all her strengths and vitality".
In late November, more controversy was sparked by the letter sent to the Moldavian Divan, which A. G. Golescu described as "unbecoming and dangerous", initiating a public dispute with the other deputies. On November 27, Bibescu resigned and left the country, arguing that progressive elements, though a minority of the country, were "imposing their ruinous politicking on the majority". On the right, the Știrbeists were evasive on the topic of union: Știrbei and his son George Barbu were hopeful that they could preserve friendly relations with the Ottoman Empire, which they prioritized over the nationalist goals.
Another rift opposed the landed or urban classes to the peasantry. During the election, Conservatorul had alleged that peasants were not interested in the vote, describing peasant candidates to a boyar assembly as "sheep among wolves". In the peasant college of Vâlcea County, interest in voting had been marginal, possibly a sign that this class did not find itself represented. In one Divan session, peasant deputy Gheorghe Lupașcu advanced a concrete proposal for direct suffrage. Described as untimely by Crețulescu, it was withdrawn by its proponent; a motion was passed according to which the Divan would refrain from ruling on electoral matters.
As explained in a speech by Ion Brătianu, nominally a leader of the "far-left", all middle- and upper-class deputies agreed on not instituting or demanding universal suffrage. Overall, Brătianu advocated class collaboration for "the general interest", hoping not to antagonize the conservatives. The same ideal was championed by Vasile Boerescu in his newspaper Naționalul, published from December 1857: though discussing the peasantry's "precarious state", he also advised self-restraint on both sides of the social divide. In its final sessions, the Divan heard another plea from peasant delegates Constantin Tănase of Olt and Marin Pârcălăbescu of Romanați, who demanded "laws based on justice" and an increased electoral weight for the peasantry. Debates over the suspension of the corvée ensued, with the boyars advancing their own report. It restated that land used by the peasants was boyar property paid for in labor, and noted that mechanized agriculture and the resulting drop of labor costs justified maintaining and expanding the corvée.
1857 Wallachian legislative election