FN 189 My account of these transactions I have been forced to take from the narrative of the Duchess of Marlborough, a narrative which is to be read with constant suspicion, except when, as is often the case, she relates some instance of her own malignity and insolence.

FN 190 The Duchess of Marlborough’s Vindication; Dartmouth’s Note on Burnet, ii. 92.; Verses of the Night Bellman of Piccadilly and my Lord Nottingham’s Order thereupon, 1691.  There is a bitter lampoon on Lady Marlborough of the same date, entitled The Universal Health, a true Union to the Queen and Princess.

FN 191 It must not be supposed that Anne was a reader of Shakspeare.  She had no doubt, often seen the Enchanted Island.  That miserable rifacimento of the Tempest was then a favourite with the town, on account of the machinery and the decorations.

FN 192 Burnet Ms. Harl. 6584.

FN 193 The history of an abortive attempt to legislate on this subject may be studied in the Commons’ Journals of 1692/3.

FN 194 North’s Examen,

FN 195 North’s Examen; Ward’s London Spy; Crosby’s English
Baptists, vol. iii. chap. 2.

FN 196 The history of this part of Fuller’s life I have taken from his own narrative.

FN 197 Commons’ Journals, Dec. 2. and 9. 1691; Grey’s Debates.

FN 198 Commons’ Journals, Jan. 4. 1691/2 Grey’s Debates.

FN 199 Commons’ Journals, Feb. 22, 23, and 24. 1691/2.

FN 200 Fuller’s Original Letters of the late King James and others to his greatest Friends in England.

FN 201 Burnet, ii. 86.  Burnet had evidently forgotten what the bill contained.  Ralph knew nothing about it but what he had learned from Burnet.  I have scarcely seen any allusion to the subject in any of the numerous Jacobite lampoons of that day.  But there is a remarkable passage in a pamphlet which appeared towards the close of William’s reign, and which is entitled The Art of Governing by Parties.  The writer says, “We still want an Act to ascertain some fund for the salaries of the judges; and there was a bill, since the Revolution, past both Houses of Parliament to this purpose; but whether it was for being any way defective or otherwise that His Majesty refused to assent to it, I cannot remember.  But I know the reason satisfied me at that time.  And I make no doubt but he’ll consent to any good bill of this nature whenever ’tis offered.”  These words convinced me that the bill was open to some grave objection which did not appear in the title, and which no historian had noticed.  I found among the archives of the House of Lords the original parchment, endorsed with the words “Le Roy et La Royne s’aviseront.”  And it was clear at the first glance what the objection was.

There is a hiatus in that part of Narcissus Luttrell’s Diary which relates to this matter.  “The King,” he wrote, “passed ten public bills and thirty-four private ones, and rejected that of the—­”