THE HAGUE – The worst fears of Europe’s ruling elite were realized yesterday as it became clear that France’s rejection of the European Union constitution had provoked a “domino effect” in Holland, which holds its own referendum tomorrow.

Opinion pollsters and leaders of the Dutch “yes” camp reported that the “no” vote in France had shattered morale among supporters of the constitution, who were now likely to stay at home in large numbers.

Many E.U. leaders joined European Commission officials in Brussels in refusing to accept that the French “no” vote, on its own, could kill off the constitution.

With France only the 10th nation to put the constitution to a vote – and the first to reject it – heads of government from more than a dozen nations issued calls for the ratification process to continue until all 25 member states have had their say.

The agony is only set to increase for European leaders, however. Holland holds its own referendum on the constitution tomorrow, and polls taken after the French result showed a marked rise for the “no” camp, to the point that “yes” campaigners have abandoned hope of a win.

With Brussels plunged into an unmistakable crisis atmosphere, some senior officials told reporters that the treaty could be defeated only if six member states voted “no” – a claim swiftly dismissed by E.U. diplomats as mistaken, or a “willful misreading” of the legal rules underpinning the text.

But with all eyes on Holland, most E.U. leaders were more cautious, confining themselves to, at times, almost surreal insistences that the French vote was not such a disaster as all that.

Germany’s Chancellor Schroeder expressed “great regret” at the French vote but said it did not mean the constitution was finished. “The outcome of the referendum is a setback for the process of ratifying the constitution, but not its end,” he said after speaking to the French president, Jacques Chirac, by telephone.

Austrian leaders voiced dismay that other E.U. governments had not heeded their call for the constitution to be ratified in a binding, single Europe-wide referendum.

The Austrian vice chancellor, Hubert Gorbach, complained that individual countries should never have been allowed to vote on a “supranational matter” such as the constitutional treaty.

“If, as our government proposed, the text had been submitted to a European referendum, we would not need to go back to square one,” he said.

In a carefully preplanned strategy, the European Commission moved to assure European citizens that the French “no” vote did not prevent the institutions of the European Union from carrying on as normal.

The president of the Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, did not deny that the French vote was a “very serious problem” and conceded, “We can’t really say it’s business as usual.”

But his official spokeswoman, Francoise Le Bail, said normal work had to continue. “We must draw a distinction between ratification of the constitution and the day-to-day running of Europe,” she said. “Just because one country has said no to the treaty, it does not call into question all E.U. policies.”

Returning to a cherished theme among Brussels Eurocrats, Ms. Le Bail suggested that improvements in the E.U.’s communications apparatus could have swung the vote the other way, and the European project needed to be “explained more clearly to citizens.”

As the constitutional treaty was not due to come into force until 2009, France’s “no” vote has no effect on the day-to-day functioning of the different E.U. institutions.

The European Union is kept running by its existing treaties, above all the Nice Treaty, though the Nice Treaty does prevent further expansion of the Union, beyond Romania and Bulgaria, which are both due to join in 2007.

Fault lines are already emerging, between those countries that believe that the ratification of the constitution can carry on, and those that believe a French “no,” especially if followed by a Dutch “no,” is a serious legal problem.

With Dutch voters concerned that Europe has gone too far and too fast without asking them, theirs would be a Eurosceptic “no.”

The French “no,” in contrast, gained at least half its strength from left-wingers who wanted more European integration, not less. Many French “no” voters demanded that Brussels impose higher taxes across the Union, increase socialist protections for workers, and resist any hint of “Anglo-Saxon” free market reforms.

After the Dutch vote, the next crisis erupts on June 16, when E.U. heads of government gather for a summit.

Officials are waiting anxiously to see if Mr. Chirac arrives all guns blazing, heaping blame on the Commission, Britain, and others for making the treaty too free-market or “liberal,” or whether he arrives to declare that the French people have spoken and that the treaty is dead.