advancement of the latter, form the main subjects of this book. In order to do justice to them within moderate limits it is necessary to suppress much that has a purely biographical, party, or military interest; and I have also not hesitated in some cases to depart from the strict order of chronology. The history of an institution or a tendency can only be written by collecting into a single focus facts that are spread over many years, and such matters may be more clearly treated according to the order of subjects than according to the order of time. It will appear evident, I think, from the foregoing sketch, that this book differs widely from the very valuable history of Lord Stanhope, which covers a great part of the same period. Two writers, dealing with the same country and the same time, must necessarily relate many of the same events; but our plans, our objects, and the classes of facts on which we have especially dwelt, are so very different that our books can hardly, I hope, come into any real competition; and I should much regret if it were thought that the present work had been written in any spirit of rivalry, or with any wish to depreciate the merits of its predecessor. Lord Stanhope was not able to bring to his task the artistic talent, the power, or the philosophical insight of some of his contemporaries; but no one can have studied with care the period about which he wrote without a feeling of deep respect for the range and accuracy of his research, for the very unusual skill which he displayed in the difficult art of selecting from great multitudes of facts those which are truly characteristic and significant, and, above all, for his transparent honesty of purpose, for the fulness and fair ness with which he seldom failed to recount the faults of those with whom he agreed and the merits of those from whom he differed. This last quality is one of the rarest in history, and it is especially admirable in a writer who had himself strong party convictions, who passed much of his life in active politics, and who was often called upon to describe contests in which his own ancestors bore a part. To the great courtesy of the authorities of the French Foreign Office I am indebted for copies of some valuable letters relating to the closing days of Queen Anne; and I must also take this opportunity of acknowledging the unwearied kindness I have received from Sir BERNARD BURKE, Ulster King of Arms, during my investigation of those Irish State Papers which he has arranged so admirably and which he knows so well. LONDON: November 1877. CONTENTS Vicissitudes of Whigs and Tories Not true that the parties have exchanged their principles The Revolution much more due to special than to general causes . 68889 Strength of the English hatred of foreigners. It acted at first in favour of the Revolution And was strengthened by the Protestant feelings of the country The jealousy of foreigners gradually turns against the Revolution Death of William Tory sympathies of Anne New Tory Ministry and Parliament The exigencies of foreign policy draw Godolphin and Marlborough towards the Whigs Partial transformation of the Ministry Blenheim Anger of the clergy against the Queen Great Whig majority of 1705 Progress of the alienation of the Government from the Tories Government at length completely Whig . Alienation of the Queen. The Ministers depend mainly for their power on the continuance of the war Negotiations of 1706 And of 1709. Marlborough refused the position of Captain-General The Church Opposition The Sacheverell case Downfall of the Whigs Coincidence of great ecclesiastical influence in England with great political and intellectual activity Relations of the clergy to the Revolution: the abjuration oath Political and religious liberty in great danger |